Litigation and Court Decisions

Subscribe to Litigation and Court Decisions

We recently reported that, upon remand from the Supreme Court (after it ruled that the CFPB’s funding mechanism is Constitutional), the plaintiff-trade groups filed a petition for rehearing en banc in the Fifth Circuit in the CFSA v. CFPB case. In the petition, they requested the Fifth Circuit en banc to rehear other claims in their case attacking the remnants of the CFPB’s payday lending regulation which had earlier been rejected by the same Fifth Circuit panel of judges who held that the CFPB was unconstitutionally funded.… Continue Reading

On July 18, 2024, in the lawsuit challenging the CFPB’s credit card late fee rule (Rule), the CFPB refiled its notice of supplemental authority in support of its motion to dismiss or transfer the case, motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, and brief in support its motion. The filings were previously stricken due to the district court’s lack of jurisdiction.… Continue Reading

Today, on the very last day for filing an appeal, the Colorado Attorney General and UCCC Administrator filed a Notice of Appeal to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals of the Colorado federal district court’s order in favor of the plaintiffs in NAIB, et al v. Weiser, et al. The lawsuit was filed by three consumer financial services industry trade groups challenging Colorado’s opt-out legislation.… Continue Reading

In a major win for the CFPB, in CFPB v Touchstone Financial, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (7th Circuit) recently held that the Regulation B provision prohibiting discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) against prospective applicants is consistent with the statute.… Continue Reading

After the Supreme Court’s long-awaited 7-2 decision in CFSA v. CFPB that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (“CFPB’s”) funding mechanism did not violate the appropriations clause of the U.S. Constitution, the case was remanded to the Fifth Circuit, which affirmed the judgment of the district court and reinstated its own judgment in favor of the CFPB on plaintiffs’ three other challenges to the Payday Lending Rule (the “Rule”) that the Fifth Circuit panel had previously rejected:

  1. That the payday lending rule’s promulgation violated the Administrative Procedure Act;
  2. That the rule was promulgated by a CFPB Director unconstitutionally insulated from presidential removal; and
  3. That the CFPB’s UDAAP rulemaking authority violates the Constitution’s separation of powers.
… Continue Reading

On July 11, 2024, the CFPB filed its unopposed Motion for the Immediate Issuance of the Mandate, the CFPB stated that they do not intend to seek a rehearing before the same panel or en banc and requested the Fifth Circuit to issue its mandate forthwith to allow the District Court to entertain further proceedings in the case.… Continue Reading

On July 11, 2024, the CFPB filed Respondent’s Motion for the Immediate Issuance of the Mandate. In the motion, the CFPB states that they do not plan to seek a rehearing before the same Fifth Circuit or En Banc and requests the Fifth Circuit to issue its mandate forthwith to allow the District Court to entertain further proceedings in the case.… Continue Reading

In an unusual move, the CFPB is coming to the defense of a bank being accused of failing to provide repayment disclosures to a borrower.

U.S. District Judge Manish Shah of the Northern District of Illinois asked for the agency to comment on whether the Bank of Orrick violated federal requirements to provide borrower Jose Lopez with required disclosures, including how long it would take for him to repay his loan if he only paid the monthly minimum payment.… Continue Reading

On July 8, 2024, in the lawsuit challenging the CFPB’s credit card late fee rule (Rule), the CFPB filed a notice of supplemental authority in support of their motion to dismiss or transfer the case, a motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, and a brief to support their motion.

On July 10, 2024, without addressing the merits of the CFPB’s motions, Judge Pittman issued an order to the Clerk to “STRIKE and UNFILE” the above mentioned filings from the docket due to the district court’s lack of jurisdiction until after the Fifth Circuit issues its mandate.… Continue Reading

On July 8, we published a blog about a landmark 7th Circuit opinion involving mass arbitration: Pauline Wallrich v. Samsung Electronics America, Incorporated. In that opinion, the Court dismissed a lawsuit against Samsung seeking an order requiring Samsung to advance AAA’s filing fees. Among other reasons, the Court held that the plaintiffs did not produce evidence documenting that they purchased Samsung devices and were subject to arbitration agreements.… Continue Reading