A relatively quiet week in the financial regulatory world doesn't necessarily translate to a week lacking important developments. Case in point: this past week.

With all the attention paid to the debt ceiling, real work was still getting done in Washington, D.C. – namely, the release of the OCC's Policies and Procedures Manual on Bank Enforcement Actions and Related Matters, which is kind of the all-encompassing day-to-day guide on bank enforcement, and the FDIC's release of the Quarterly Banking Profile, which emphasized the general stability of the banking industry despite the upheavals earlier this year. And what's a week of coverage in Cabinet News and Views without at least some examination of crypto.  

What's on your mind? I'd love to hear. You can reach out to me here.

Daniel Meade 
Partner and Editor, Cabinet News and Views

By Daniel Meade

Partner | Financial Regulation

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued an updated Policies and Procedures Manual on Bank Enforcement Actions and Related Matters last week. The PPM is updated from the 2018 issuance. The headline change in the PPM is the addition of a new Appendix C titled “Actions Against Banks With Persistent Weaknesses.” The Appendix states that it generally would only apply to banks subject to heightened standards under 12 CFR Part 30 (i.e., large banks), but the OCC reserves the right to apply the framework in the new Appendix to any bank or thrift in its jurisdiction.

Read More »

By Daniel Meade

Partner | Financial Regulation

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation yesterday issued the latest Quarterly Banking Profile for the first quarter of 2023. 

Read More »

By Mercedes Kelley Tunstall

Partner | Financial Regulation

Stepping into a breach that finds the United States without a comprehensive cryptocurrency framework while the EU is about to implement its own cryptocurrency framework this July (called Markets in Crypto Assets or MiCA), the International Organization of Securities Commissions recently proffered a Consultation Report on “Policy Recommendations for Crypto and Digital Assets Markets.”

Read More »

By Jason M. Halper

Partner | Global Litigation

By Adam K. Magid

Special Counsel | Global Litigation

By Diane Lee

Associate | Global Litigation

In York County v. HP, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit further clarified national standards governing the two-year statute of limitations applicable to private claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Joining the Second Circuit (and others), the Court held that the statute of limitations begins to run when a “reasonably diligent plaintiff” would have discovered the “facts constituting the violation” (including scienter), and that occurs when such a plaintiff can plead those facts “with sufficient detail and particularity to survive a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.” York contributes to a growing consensus among the circuits on the standards applicable to the two-year Section 10(b) statute of limitations. It also advances the law by articulating a framework for courts to assess when, on the pleadings alone, a Section 10(b) claim may be dismissed as untimely (i.e., when the complaint fails to plead that a “necessary” Section 10(b) “fact” became discoverable within two years of the complaint’s filing). While York is an important addition to jurisprudence on Section 10(b) limitations periods, questions remain, including the full gamut of “facts constituting the violation” that a reasonably diligent plaintiff must discover for the clock to start ticking.

You can read our Clients & Friends Memo here.