Home > Regulation & Examinations > Bank Examinations > FDIC Enforcement Decisions and Orders
FDIC Enforcement Decisions and Orders
FDIC dismisses respondent's Petition for Stay of June 17, 2004 Decision and Order on Interlocutory Review.
[.1] MootnessCourt action moots motions
In the Matter of
On June 17, 2004, the Executive Secretary of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), pursuant to authority delegated by the FDIC Board of Directors (Board) under 12 C.F.R. §308.102(b)(2)(ii), issued a Decision and Order (Order) denying Respondent Randolph W. Lenz's ("Lenz") Petition for Interlocutory Review (Petition) filed on March 16, 2004. In his Petition, Lenz had sought Board review and reversal of a March 2, 2004 order by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) directing that he produce a privilege log identifying documents withheld from discovery. On June 24, 2004, in response to the Order, the ALJ ordered that the privilege log be produced by July 16, 2004. On July 19, 2004, the ALJ extended the production deadline until August 31, 2004. In the meantime, on July 2, 2004, Lenz filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) a petition for a writ of mandamus (Mandamus Petition) seeking relief from the Order. Thereafter, on August 11, 2004, the FDIC received from Lenz a Motion for Stay of the June 17, 2004, Decision and Order on Interlocutory Review (Stay Motion). In his Stay Motion, which was dated August 2, 2004, Lenz requested that the ALJ's Order be stayed until the D.C. Circuit resolved his Mandamus Petition. At the same time, Lenz filed in the D.C. Circuit a Motion to Expedite Consideration of his Mandamus Petition (Motion to Expedite).
FDIC Enforcement Counsel (Enforcement Counsel), in a pleading dated August 16, 2004, filed in the D.C. Circuit a Response to Lenz's Mandamus Petition stating that because the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia had on July 27, 2004 issued an order granting Enforcement Counsel full access to the documents seized by the FBI, the ALJ's Order and Lenz's Mandamus Petition was moot. In other words, because FDIC Enforcement Counsel now has complete access to the documents which Lenz had previously withheld from discovery, it is no longer necessary for Lenz to produce a privilege log. In a response to Lenz's Stay Motion, also dated August 16, 2004, Enforcement Counsel reiterated its argument that the Order is moot.
[.1] In an Order filed on August
30, 2004, the D.C. Circuit ordered that Lenz's Mandamus Petition and
Motion to Expedite be dismissed as moot in light of Enforcement
Counsel's representation that it no longer seeks from Lenz a privilege
log. For the same reason, Lenz's Stay Motion is moot and is hereby
It is hereby ORDERED, that Lenz's Motion for Stay of June 17, 2004 Decision and Order on Interlocutory Review is dismissed.
Pursuant to delegated authority, upon the advice and recommendation of the Deputy General Counsel for Litigation.
Dated at Washington, D.C., this 30th day of September, 2004.
|Last Updated email@example.com|