Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc.

N.D. California

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California·Decided May 11, 2023·No. 3:15-cv-02106·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 9 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 10 BUREAU, Case No. 15-cv-02106-RS

11 Plaintiff, ORDER SETTING BRIEFING 12 v. SCHEDULE

ADMINISTRATION, INC., et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 On consideration of the parties’ joint case management conference statement, the 17 conference set for May 18, 2023, is vacated. The parties are in agreement that briefing should 18 proceed at this time on the so-called “Seila Law” and “restitution” issues, but disagree as to 19 whether briefing on the constitutionality of the CFPB’s funding should await the Supreme Court’s 20 anticipated decision in Community Financial Services Ass’n of America, Ltd. v. CFPB, 51 F.4th 21 616 (5th Cir. 2022), cert. granted, 2023 WL 2227658 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2023) (No. 22-448). 22 The parties also disagree as to page limits. Plaintiff proposes the normal motion practice limits 23 should apply for each of the three issues. Defendants seek additional pages for both the Seila Law 24 issue and the constitutionality issue, as to which they are effectively the “moving parties.” 25 Briefing on the constitutionality issue will not be postponed, although the court reserves 26 the discretion to defer issuing a decision until the Supreme Court rules. Because this means the 27 parties will be addressing one more issue than they perhaps had anticipated, their proposed 1 June 29, 2023 2 -- Defendants shall file an opening brief, not to exceed 35 pages, regarding the 3 Seila Law issue identified in the Ninth Circuit’s Memorandum Disposition at pages 3-4. 4 -- Defendants shall file an opening brief, not to exceed 35 pages, regarding the 5 issue of the constitutionality of the CFPB’s funding mechanism identified in the 6 Memorandum Disposition at page 4. 7 -- Plaintiff shall file an opening brief, not to exceed 25 pages, regarding the 8 restitution issue identified in the Memorandum Disposition at pages 4-5. 9 10 August 3, 2023 11 The parties shall file oppositions, each not to exceed the number of pages allowed gq 12 for the corresponding opening briefs.

14 September 7, 2023

2 15 The parties may file reply briefs not to exceed 15 pages each. 16

= 17 The matter may then be set for hearing at the court’s discretion.

18 19 ITISSO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: May 11, 2023 22 Chief United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28 CASE No. 15-cv-02106-RS

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 9 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 10 BUREAU, Case No. 15-cv-02106-RS

11 Plaintiff, ORDER SETTING BRIEFING 12 v. SCHEDULE

ADMINISTRATION, INC., et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 On consideration of the parties’ joint case management conference statement, the 17 conference set for May 18, 2023, is vacated. The parties are in agreement that briefing should 18 proceed at this time on the so-called “Seila Law” and “restitution” issues, but disagree as to 19 whether briefing on the constitutionality of the CFPB’s funding should await the Supreme Court’s 20 anticipated decision in Community Financial Services Ass’n of America, Ltd. v. CFPB, 51 F.4th 21 616 (5th Cir. 2022), cert. granted, 2023 WL 2227658 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2023) (No. 22-448). 22 The parties also disagree as to page limits. Plaintiff proposes the normal motion practice limits 23 should apply for each of the three issues. Defendants seek additional pages for both the Seila Law 24 issue and the constitutionality issue, as to which they are effectively the “moving parties.” 25 Briefing on the constitutionality issue will not be postponed, although the court reserves 26 the discretion to defer issuing a decision until the Supreme Court rules. Because this means the 27 parties will be addressing one more issue than they perhaps had anticipated, their proposed 1 June 29, 2023 2 -- Defendants shall file an opening brief, not to exceed 35 pages, regarding the 3 Seila Law issue identified in the Ninth Circuit’s Memorandum Disposition at pages 3-4. 4 -- Defendants shall file an opening brief, not to exceed 35 pages, regarding the 5 issue of the constitutionality of the CFPB’s funding mechanism identified in the 6 Memorandum Disposition at page 4. 7 -- Plaintiff shall file an opening brief, not to exceed 25 pages, regarding the 8 restitution issue identified in the Memorandum Disposition at pages 4-5. 9 10 August 3, 2023 11 The parties shall file oppositions, each not to exceed the number of pages allowed gq 12 for the corresponding opening briefs.

14 September 7, 2023

2 15 The parties may file reply briefs not to exceed 15 pages each. 16

= 17 The matter may then be set for hearing at the court’s discretion.

18 19 ITISSO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: May 11, 2023 22 Chief United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28 CASE No. 15-cv-02106-RS

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc., (N.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc. (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.