U.S. v. Jackson, 229 F.3d 1223 (9^th Cir. 2000)-Jackson pled guilty to embezzlement of union assets provided he made full restitution. Jackson had assets in an ERISA-covered pension plan. Fashioning an order based on Jackson's ability to pay depended on the use of the undistributed assets in his ERISA plan. The District Court included those undistributed assets in the plan. Jackson argued the order requiring him to pay immediate restitution from his undistributed ERISA pension plan violated ERISA’s anti-alienation provision.  The Ninth Circuit found that the District Court premised the restitution order on the district court's authority to order Jackson to cash out his undistributed ERISA pension plan funds. 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1) makes it clear that the district court had no such authority. The Ninth Circuit remanded for a new order based on Jackson's ability to pay exclusive of the undistributed ERISA plan funds.