Here is the order in Mylan Pharmaceuticals v. St. Regis Mohawk Tribe:
Materials here.
Here is the notice in Consumer Financial Protection Board v. Golden Valley Lending et al, 17-cv-02521 (Kan.):
101 – Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i)
From Law360(Paywall):
The federal government filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of its loan practices suit against four lenders owned by the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, but didn’t offer a specific reason why. The CFPB said in a brief statement to Law360 that it would “continue to investigate the transactions that were at issue,” but declined to comment further because it was an open enforcement issue.
The government did say, however, in a filing from Dec. 5 that the bureau wanted more time to “consult with new leadership” before it submitted additional briefs.
The CFPB’s move to toss the case came just two days after news that the bureau planned to reopen a controversial rule that would bring federal regulations to the payday lending and auto-title lending industries.
The CFPB under its former director, Richard Cordray, finalized a rule in October that would for the first time mandate that payday lenders determine that borrowers can afford the loans they take out, amid a host of other major reforms, marking the last major action of his tenure.
But Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, who is serving as the acting director of the CFPB under an appointment by President Donald Trump that is currently being contested at the D.C. Circuit, is a known opponent of the rule, and on Tuesday he made his move to reopen rulemaking procedures, with the likely effect of taking apart many of its most important provisions.
Here are the materials in the matter of Pennachietti v. Mansfield, 17-cv-02582 (E. Penn. Dec. 11, 2017):
Link to deja vu suit.
Here are the materials in the matter of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources v. Timber and Wood Products Located in Sawyer County et al, 2017AP181 (Dec. 19, 2017):
Here are the amici curiae in the matter of Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al v. St. Regis Mohawk Tribe et al:
For Movants:
In Opposition:
Link: Case archive
Here is the brief from Lawrence Tribe, William Eskridge, Erwin Chemerinsky, Joe Singer, and David Orozco:
Here is the amicus brief filed in Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Allergan Inc.:
Here is the unpublished opinion in WD at the Canyon v. Honga.
Here. An excerpt:
The IG report concluded that the loan guarantee “departed from” department guidelines but didn’t find any criminal violations. A federal grand jury investigated the episode, according to a spokeswoman for the IG, but did not hand up any indictments.
Still, the fiasco generated criticism both inside the tribe, according to the IG’s report, and outside. Said Arvind Ganesan, the director of Human Rights Watch’s Business and Human Rights Division, who researched the deal as part of a broader report on the Lower Brule Sioux: “It’s pretty disturbing that he’s now in charge of a department that’s being sued over a deal that he arranged and that went so badly.“
Link to Human Rights Watch report on the Lower Brule Sioux issues here.
Link to OIG report here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.