Whether and to what extent district courts must consider ERISA's purpose in awarding attorney's fees to a successful defendant

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether and to what extent district courts must consider ERISA’s purpose “to protect *** the interests of participants in employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries,” 29 U.S.C. § 1001(b), in exercising their discretion to award attorney’s fees to a successful defendant under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1). 2. Whether the burden-shifting framework established by McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) for proving discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., which is “designed to assure that the plaintiff [has] his day in court despite the unavailability of direct evidence,” Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 121 (1985) (internal quotation omitted), applies when the plaintiff can prove discrimination by direct evidence. ce) STATEMENT OF