With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". intent under the guise of federal common law. Plucinski v. I.A.M. Nat’l Pension Fund, 875 F.2d 1052, 1056 (3d Cir.1989). V. We have held that an employer can be liable under ERISA in its fiduciary capacity for making affirmative misrepresentations on breach of fiduciary duty and equitable estoppel theories. Fischer v. Philadelphia Elec. Co., 994 F.2d 130, 133-35 (3d Cir.1993). See also Haberem v. Kaupp Vascular Surgeons Ltd. Defined Benefit Pension Plan, 24 F.3d 1491, 1502-03 (3d Cir.1994); Smith v. Hartford Ins. Group, 6 F.3d 131, 141 n. 13 (3d Cir.1993). Here Mrs. Curcio primarily presents an equitable estoppel claim, which is authorized under ERISA pursuant to § 1132(a)(3)(B) set forth above. Bixler v. Central Pa. Teamsters Health & Welfare Fund, 12 F.3d 1292, 1298 (3d Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). She alternatively argues that Capital Health

A: holding that claims for equitable relief under  502a3 are only available when a plaintiff has no other relief under erisa
B: holding that equitable relief is only appropriate where legal remedies are inadequate
C: holding that  1132a3b authorizes the award of appropriate equitable relief to a beneficiary for violations of erisa
D: holding that arbitrators award of temporary interim equitable relief can be confirmed
C.