Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-09555/USCOURTS-ca10-90-09555-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Respondent
Southwestern Bank and Trust Company, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Petitioner
The Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Respondent

Document Text:

FI LED 

United States Courr of Appeals 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Cir::uit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

SOUTHWESTERN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, 

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION and THE BOARD OF 

DIRECTORS OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT 

INSURANCE CORPORATION, 

Respondents. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * 

SEP 21 1990 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 90-9555 

(FDIC 89-24a) 

Before McKAY, McWILLIAMS, and MOORE, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

This is a petition for review of an interlocutory decision 

and order of the board of directors (Board) of the Federal Deposit 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-9555 Document: 010110053420 Date Filed: 09/21/1990 Page: 1 
Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which reversed a prior determination 

of an administrative law judge (ALJ) in a discovery matter. The 

matter is before the court on motion of Southwestern Bank and 

Trust Company (Bank) for stay of the underlying administrative 

proceedings pending review. 

As we understand it, the underlying proceedings were 

commenced by the FDIC for involuntary termination of the Bank's 

insured status pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1818(a)(2). During those 

proceedings, the Bank sought discovery of certain materials in the 

possession of the FDIC, which were alleged to be relevant to a 

purported affirmative defense. Over the FDIC's objection, the ALJ 

ordered discovery. On review, the Board reversed, concluding that 

the requested discovery materials were not relevant to issues to 

be determined during the administrative proceedings. The Bank 

seeks appellate review of the FDIC's determination pursuant to 12 

u.s.c. § 1818(h). 

It is well settled that the jurisdiction of the federal 

courts is statutory. Here, our reading of the judicial review 

provisions applicable in this case limit our jurisdiction to 

review to final decisions of the FDIC. See 12 u.s.c. 

§§ 1818(a)(5) and 1818(h)(l) and (2). Further, it has been the 

consistent policy of Congress to impose strict limits on 

interlocutory appellate review. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, 

Inc., 449 U.S. 33 (1980). 

From this, we conclude that the petition for review is 

premature and must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The 

Appellate Case: 90-9555 Document: 010110053420 Date Filed: 09/21/1990 Page: 2 
motion for stay pending review is denied as moot. We also observe 

that petitioner has failed to address the criteria required by 

10th Cir. R. 8.1. 

The petition is DISMISSED. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

Appellate Case: 90-9555 Document: 010110053420 Date Filed: 09/21/1990 Page: 3