Banking and Finance Law Daily Wrap Up, WORTH NOTING—Other regulatory, legislative, litigation, and industry developments, (Jan 16, 2026)

By WK Editorial Staff

A weekly roundup of other items of interest to the banking and finance law community.

CAPITAL AND BASEL ACCORDS—The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Reserve Board, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have reported no material differences in the accounting and capital standards they apply to insured depository institutions as of Sept. 30, 2025. The agencies noted that their capital rules were comprehensively harmonized in 2013 and have been jointly revised several times since, further narrowing any remaining gaps. According to the report, only a few differences in capital standards persist, and those stem from statutory requirements rather than regulatory divergence. The agencies confirmed that these limited differences do not affect the overall alignment of their capital frameworks for institutions under their supervision.

CRIMES AND OFFENSES—U.S.: In a novel case in which an individual, P.A. Duru, was convicted of aggravated identity theft in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A and18 U.S.C. § 2(a) “in relation to a conspiracy to commit wire fraud, bank fraud, and mail fraud” with another co-defendant, Duru filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 2, 2026, to challenge his conviction and sentencing that had been upheld by a divided appellate panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. According to Peru’s petition, Duru’s co-defendants were convicted of crimes involving many more victims and much larger sums of money. Meanwhile Duru, who had no prior criminal history, “was only connected to one victim and an intended, but not actual, loss of $25,600.” A co-defendant, “Igbokwe” claimed to have asked Duru to open bank accounts into which Igbokwe could funnel funds. While Duru “initially turned Igbokwe down before finally agreeing,” Duru ultimately used his own identity to register a business (PD Enterprise) and used his own personal information “to open a bank account at Bank of America and at Wells Fargo using his real name and address.” Later, Igbokwe sent Duru’s account information to several individuals. Against this backdrop, Duru’s petition asks: (i) whether 18 U.S.C. § 1028A, which applies to the use “without lawful authority, [of] a means of identification of another person” permits conviction based on a defendant’s consensual use and sharing of his own information; (ii) whether using a means of identification to open a bank account satisfies the requirement that that use be at the “crux of what makes the underlying offense criminal;” and (iii) whether the term “victim” in the federal sentencing guidelines (U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(2)(A)(i)) includes individuals “who sustained no actual loss” (Duru v. USA, No. 25-796 (U.S. Jan. 2, 2026)).

ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS—The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency announced a series of January 2026 enforcement actions, beginning with an Order of Prohibition against Tamim Haidar, a former Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. branch operations manager. The OCC found that the individual embezzled more than $800,000 in bank funds and falsified bank records, conduct that violated federal banking laws governing institution-affiliated parties. The OCC also terminated a 2024 Cease and Desist Order against Clear Fork Bank, N.A., which had failed to implement a Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML) compliance program reasonably designed to meet statutory and regulatory requirements. Similarly, the OCC terminated its 2025 Formal Agreement with Dearborn FSB, which had been issued after the agency found unsafe or unsound practices involving compliance management, fair lending risk oversight, insider activities, compensation practices, and recordkeeping violations. The termination of the 2024 Formal Agreement with The Fairfield National Bank followed OCC findings of unsafe or unsound practices in staffing, credit risk rating, underwriting, administration, loan review, and allowance processes, along with a violation relating to inaccurate Call Reports. The OCC also terminated its 2020 Cease and Desist Order against Mission National Bank, which previously faced findings of unsafe or unsound practices and violations of BSA/AML requirements, including failure to maintain a compliant BSA/AML program and to correct previously identified deficiencies. Finally, the OCC ended its 2023 Cease and Desist Order against The Upstate National Bank, which had been cited for unsafe or unsound practices relating to board oversight, governance, strategic and capital planning, interest rate and liquidity risk management, and violations of 12 U.S.C. §161 concerning Call Reports.

ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS—E.D. Va.: After having previously denied any final approval of a class action settlement in the “Capital One 360 Savings Account Interest Rate Litigation” in November 2025 (see Banking and Finance Law Daily, May 19, 2025, Sept. 25, 2025, and Nov. 10, 2025), the federal district court in Alexandria, Virginia has now issued a Jan. 12, 2026, order preliminarily approving a revised class action settlement and scheduling a final approval hearing. The court’s preliminary approval clears a path toward final resolution of claims advanced by state attorneys general from eight states—California, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Ohio, and Rhode Island—that will require Capital One “to provide $425 million in restitution and better interest rates for its 360 Savings customers” who were “cheated out of higher interest payments on their savings accounts for years,” according to the state AGs. “Today we are delivering justice for those customers nationwide and ensuring that they will receive the higher interest rates they were originally promised,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James. Likewise, California Attorney General Rob Bunta stated that “Capital One misled consumers through false marketing and a lack of transparency regarding its savings account system Given an opportunity to make loyal customers whole, Capital One sank their teeth in even more, attempting to underpay people it harmed and continue its deceptive practices.” Further, Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown remarked, “In opposing the previous, unfair settlement, we pushed for a better agreement that returns millions more to Marylanders’ pockets” (In re: Capital One 360 Savings Account Interest Rate Litigation, MDL No. 1:24md3111 (DJN) E.D. Va. Jan. 12, 2026)).

FINANCIAL STABILITY—The Federal Reserve Board, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency have notified supervised financial institutions that materials, including supplemental instructions, pertaining to the “Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Reports)” for the Dec. 31, 2025, report date are now available. Except for certain financial institutions with foreign offices, completed Call Reports must be received by January 30th. Moreover, financial institutions are encouraged to complete the preparation, editing, and review of Call Report data and submission to the Central Data Repository as early as possible.

LOANS—Student loan complaints surged to record levels in the past award year, with rising delays in company responses and a sharp uptick in fraud related grievances, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s 2025 Private Education Loan Ombudsman Report. The CFPB received about 22,900 federal and private student loan complaints from July 2024 through June 2025, the highest one year total on record. Private loan complaints rose 33 percent to roughly 4,500, while federal loan complaints jumped 36 percent to about 18,400. Roughly 20 percent of complaints sent to companies drew untimely responses—double the prior year’s rate. The Bureau’s warns in the report that slow responses may push borrowers toward scammers and urged coordinated enforcement, stronger consumer education and improved industry responsiveness.

LOANS—The Federal Reserve Board has released its most-recent periodic report under Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act, outlining the status of emergency lending facilities as of December 31, 2025. Notably, the Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility (PPPLF) shows $63,090,024 in outstanding advances fully secured by collateral, with interest and fees accruing to $470,673,975, and is expected to close without losses. Additionally, the Main Street Lending Program—spanning five facilities—recorded $43,860,550 in loans outstanding to the special purpose vehicle, backed by $1,613,039,976 in collateral, generating $3,633,760,245 in revenue. In addition, the Fed has released transaction-specific disclosures for the PPPLF.

PREEMPTION—U.S.: The U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in SunTrust Bank v. Bickerstaff, a case in which the petitioner, SunTrust Bank, had asked the High Court whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts Georgia state law and civil procedure concerning the bank’s deposit agreement allowing a depositor to reject arbitration. In the underlying litigation with its customer (Bickerstaff), the Georgia Supreme Court in 2016 nullified a provision in the bank’s deposit agreement requiring individual customers “to provide timely and particularized written notice to opt out of arbitration” (see Banking and Finance Law Daily, Jul. 22, 2016). According to the bank, Georgia’s high court held that by filing a class-action lawsuit, Bickerstaff had “effectively opted out of arbitration not only for himself, but for thousands of unnamed class members;” however, “Federal courts have declined to endorse that reasoning,” recognizing that such an arbitration-specific rule “would be preempted by the FAA [Federal Arbitration Act],” the bank contended. Ultimately, SunTrust Bank filed its Supreme Court petition after “Bickerstaff II” proceedings in which the Georgia Supreme Court denied review of a decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals, which, according to the bank, “doubled down, broadening Bickerstaff II to reach even those class members whose agreements expressly prohibit opting out via lawsuit.” Along these lines SunTrust Bank’s November 2025 petition had asked the U.S. Supreme Court “[w]hether the FAA preempts a state court rule permitting a proposed class representative to effectively opt out of arbitration on behalf of all unnamed class members notwithstanding contrary, express requirements in the arbitration agreement” (SunTrust Bank v. Bickerstaff, No. 25-585 (U.S. Jan. 12, 2026)).

Attorneys: Lisa S. Blatt (Williams & Connolly LLP) for SunTrust Bank. Adam Jospeh Riff, Office of the New York State Attorney General, for The People of the State of New York, By Letitia James. Jamie Stephen Dycus (King & Spalding LLP) for Capital One, N.A. and Capital One Financial Corp. Anne Margaret Voigts (Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP) for Princewell Arinze Duru. D. John Sauer, U.S. Department of Justice, for the United States.

Companies: Bank of America; Capital One, N.A.; Capital One Financial Corp.; Clear Fork Bank, N.A.; Dearborn FSB; Mission National Bank; SunTrust Bank The Fairfield National Bank; The Upstate National Bank; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

IndustryNews: BankingOperations CaliforniaNews CapitalBaselAccords CFPB CrimesOffenses DirectorsOfficersEmployers DoddFrankAct EnforcementActions FederalReserveSystem FinancialStability GeorgiaNews IdentityTheft Loans MarylandNews MassachusettsNews MinnesotaNews NevadaNews NewYorkNews OhioNews Preemption PrudentialRegulation RhodeIslandNews StateBankingLaws SupremeCtNews UDAAP