1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION :

ADMINISTRATION BOARD, : No. 4:06-CV-00308

as liquidating agent for LOCK :

HAVEN AREA FEDERAL :

CREDIT UNION, :

:

Plaintiff, : (Judge McClure)

:

v. :

:

JOSEPH S. FISHER, :

:

Defendant. :

O R D E R

March 10, 2006

BACKGROUND:

On August 4, 2005, Lock Haven Area Federal Credit Union (“Lock Haven”)

filed a complaint in the Clinton County Court of Common Pleas against defendant

Joseph S. Fisher seeking $7,229.17, plus interest, attorney fees, and costs, based

on Fisher’s default on an installment note issued to defendant by Lock Haven. On

August 8, 2006, the Nation Credit Union Administration (“NCUA”), placed Lock

Haven into liquidation. Thereafter, the NCUA was appointed as liquidating agent

for Lock Haven. On August 23, 2005, Fisher filed his answer and new matter,

Case 4:06-cv-00308-JFM Document 5 Filed 03/10/06 Page 1 of 3
1We have jurisdiction of this case regardless of the amount in controversy

under 12 U.S.C. § 1789(a)(2), and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1345, because the

NCUA is an independent federal agency.

2

including a two-count counterclaim against Lock Haven asserting violations of the

Uniform Commercial Code and violations of the Unfair Trade Practice Act.

On or about February 6, 2006, the NCUA, as liquidating agent for Lock

Haven, filed a Voluntary Substitution as Party Plaintiff with the Clinton County

Court of Common Pleas, substituting itself as successor for Lock Haven. On

February 10, 2006, the NCUA Board removed the lawsuit to this court.1

On February 14, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss Fisher’s

counterclaims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(b)(1). Defendant has not filed a brief in opposition and the motion is now ripe

for our review. Under our local rule LR 7.6, defendant is deemed not to oppose

the motion. 

For the following reasons we will grant plaintiff’s motion to dismiss Fisher’s

counterclaims.

DISCUSSION:

Defendant’s counterclaims against Lock Haven assert violations of the

Uniform Commercial Code and violations of the Unfair Trade Practice Act. The

Case 4:06-cv-00308-JFM Document 5 Filed 03/10/06 Page 2 of 3
3

counterclaims relate to the manner in which Lock Haven seized Fisher’s 1997

Pontiac Grand Am in connection with it’s being held as collateral on the note at

issue. As his answer indicates, defendant is aware that Lock Haven has been

placed into liquidation. The counterclaims relate to an act or omission of the credit

union. Thus, there is no judicial review of Fisher’s counterclaims pursuant to 12

U.S.C. § 1787(b)(13)(D)(ii). We lack jurisdiction to hear defendant’s

counterclaims and they must be dismissed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant’s counterclaims is granted.

 

(Rec. Doc. No. 2.)

2. Defendant’s counterclaims asserting violations of the Uniform

Commercial Code and violations of the Unfair Trade Practice Act are dismissed for

lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1787(b)(13)(D)(ii).

 s/ James F. McClure, Jr. 

James F. McClure, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-00308-JFM Document 5 Filed 03/10/06 Page 3 of 3