With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in 1995. She claims that though she moved, she kept a post office box in Toledo, Ohio, where the information should have been sent. 5 . Del Rio also argues that Toledo Edison failed to abide by the terms of the LTD plan because the appeals committee did not independently review the medical evidence in the case. Appellant’s Br. at 25. We find this argument to be without merit. First, Del Rio did not offer any medical evidence to the appeals committee to review. Second, assuming arguendo that Toledo Edison failed to abide by the LTD Plan’s procedures, Del Rio would be entitled to only equitable relief, not the compensatory and punitive damages which she is seeking. ERISA § 502(a)(3); see also Mertens v. Hewitt Assocs., 508 U.S. 248, 255-59 & n. 7, 113 S.Ct. 2063, 124 L.Ed.2d 161 (1993) (<HOLDING>). Because we conclude that Del Rio is

A: holding compensatory and punitive damages constitute legal remedies
B: holding that claims for equitable relief under  502a3 are only available when a plaintiff has no other relief under erisa
C: holding that when compensatory damages are nominal a much higher ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages can be contemplated
D: holding that equitable relief under  502a3 does not include compensatory and punitive damages
D.