Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in instant ERISA action by plaintiff-profit-sharing 401(k) plan, alleging that defendant, which provided investment, record-keeping and administrative services to instant 401(k) plan, breached fiduciary duty to plan by failing to disclose defendant’s revenue sharing practices with mutual funds. Defendant was not named fiduciary of plan, and Dist. Ct. could properly conclude that defendant did not owe any fiduciary duty to plan with respect to its revenue sharing practices, because it was not “functional fiduciary” within meaning of 29 USC section 1002(21)(A). Fact that defendant offered plan participants menu of mutual funds and other investment opportunities and held right to substitute selected funds did not render defendant as functional fiduciary. Moreover, plaintiff did not otherwise establish that defendant mismanaged its separate account, which contained plan participants’ contributions.