McCulloch v. Board of Trustees of the SEIU Affiliates Officers and

*69 SUMMARY ORDER Kevin McCulloch appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Gardephe, J.), granting summary judgment in favor of the SEIU Affiliates Officers and Employees Pension Plan (“the Plan”) and its Board of Directors, on the ground that McCulloch, failed to exhaust the Plan’s internal administrative procedures before filing suit. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review. The general rule is that exhaustion is required for ERISA claims. See Kennedy v. Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 989 F.2d 588, 594 (2d Cir. 1993); Leonelli v. Pennwalt Corp., 887 F.2d 1195, 1199 (2d Cir. 1989). However, we have not decided whether an exception applies when a plaintiff brings a claim premised on statutory violations and that does not require interpretation of the plan’s terms. Nechis v. Oxford Health Plans, Inc., 421 F.3d 96, 102 (2d Cir. 2005) (“This circuit has not addressed the specific question whether exhaustion is required for statutory claims.... ’’). McCulloch asserts that his claim is statutory and does not require exhaustion. His claim is not statutory. To determine whether McCulloch had the right he asserts, the district court would have needed to construe specific terms of the Plan. Because his claim is not statutory, McCul-loch was required to exhaust internal administrative remedies. Accordingly we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.