Case 2:07-cv JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No. 08-CV-12634

Federal Court Dismisses Data Breach Class Action Brought Against J.P. Morgan Chase Based on Federal Preemption

The New York State Attorney General is barred from enforcing state STATES LACK ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY OVER NATIONAL BANKS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 6:12-cv ACC-TBS. versus

Case 4:10-cv JEG -RAW Document 43 Filed 08/29/11 Page 1 of 17

Case 1:18-cv VM Document 21 Filed 02/26/19 Page 1 of 26 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT

Case 2:07-cv JF-SDP Document 13 Filed 05/12/2008 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Supreme Court of the United States

Case 2:00-cv JF Document 257 Filed 01/10/2007 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Financial ServicesAlert

CLOSED CIVIL CASE. Case 1:09-cv DLG Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/14/2010 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Case 1:17-cv NRB Document 19 Filed 08/18/17 Page 1 of 31 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT

Cuomo v. Clearing House Association: The Latest Chapter in the OCC's Pursuit of Chevron Deference

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION : : : : ORDER

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Consumer Financial Protection Act: Preemption Questions

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84

APPENDIX TEXT OF SUBTITLE D OF TITLE X OF THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET REFORM AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW. Subtitle D Preservation of State Law

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13-cv-446-MOC-DSC

Case 2:14-cv GHK-AJW Document 33 Filed 10/29/14 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:452

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:12-CV REDRIDGE FINANCE GROUP, LLC

Case 1:11-cv JMS-DKL Document 97 Filed 08/28/12 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 698

Case 0:10-cv WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case No Civ-SCOLA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER

Case 1:05-cv HWB Document 20 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 3:16-cv RRE-ARS Document 46 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION DEFENDANT S AMENDED MOTION TO DISMISS WITH SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM

Case 2:09-cv GCS-MKM Document 24 Filed 12/22/2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. No. 5:14-CV-133-FL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

Case 1:11-cv AWI-JLT Document 3 Filed 01/06/12 Page 1 of 3

Case 2:10-cv GCS-VMM Document 33 Filed 11/22/10 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 4:15-cv JSW Document 55 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY OWENSBORO DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Supreme Court of the United States

Case 9:16-cv KAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/24/2017 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Plaintiff United States of America ( plaintiff ) commenced this action seeking payment for the indebtedness of

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Richmond Division. v. ) Civil Action No. 3:08-CV-799 MEMORANDUM OPINION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case CIV-WPD ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) OPINION AND ORDER

Case 1:09-cv JTC Document 28 Filed 02/24/11 Page 1 of 11. Plaintiffs, 09-CV-982-JTC. Defendant.

Case 1:18-cv DLF Document 12-1 Filed 01/07/19 Page 1 of 54 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 5:10-cv HRL Document 65 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:17-cv RBS-DEM Document 21 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 20 PageID# 175

REPORT, RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER. This case was referred to the undersigned by the Hon. Richard J. Arcara,

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cv TWT.

United States District Court

DOC#:- -:-:-+--+.~- I

Case 1:09-cv NMG Document 29 Filed 12/01/2009 Page 1 of 12. United States District Court District of Massachusetts MEMORANDUM & ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case Doc 28 Filed 04/08/16 EOD 04/08/16 16:05:16 Pg 1 of 10 SO ORDERED: April 8, James M. Carr United States Bankruptcy Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC10-974

Case 2:16-cv RCM Document 9-1 Filed 06/23/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. v. Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-1570-L MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. v. No. 04 C 8104 MEMORANDUM OPINION

Case 2:05-cv WBS -GGH Document 225 Filed 03/31/11 Page 1 of 12. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----oo0oo----

Case No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MICHELLE FLANAGAN, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DONALD M. LUSNAK, BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn

4:15-cv TGB-EAS Doc # 16 Filed 11/01/16 Pg 1 of 11 Pg ID 102 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:14-cv JCC-IDD Document 7 Filed 10/14/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 39

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION Case No. 7:14-CV F

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

ENTRY ON DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO S MOTION TO DISMISS. Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C et seq., in 1970.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case M:06-cv VRW Document 613 Filed 05/07/2009 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT ORDER FOR A CIVIL MONEY PENALTY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case Number Honorable David M.

Supreme Court of the United States

Case 3:15-cv MMC Document 113 Filed 11/22/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NOW COME Defendants Michael P. Daniel, M.D. and Daniel Urological Center, Inc.,

EXHIBIT E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC

United States District Court for the District of Delaware

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CIVIL NO. 4:86CV00291

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

Case 3:06-cv TBR Document 12 Filed 09/06/2007 Page 1 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

2:12-cv DPH-MKM Doc # 10 Filed 04/30/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 99 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: May 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008) Docket No.

SUMMARY OF YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THE SETTLEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 9:13-cv KAM Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/17/2014 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:13-CV-678-MOC-DSC

Case 1:07-cv SSB-TSH Document 27 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:18-cv DLF Document 16-1 Filed 02/05/19 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO MC-UNGARO/SIMONTON

Transcription:

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION NNDJ, INC., MARY EGHIGIAN, JANET TERTERIAN, AMY DLUZYNSKI, and EZGAR VILLARREAL, Plaintiffs, v. Civil No. 07-14406 Hon. John Feikens NATIONAL CITY BANK, COMERICA INCORPORATED, JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. and FIFTH THIRD BANCORP d/b/a FIFTH THIRD BANK, Defendants. / ORDER GRANTING THE NATIONAL BANKS MOTION TO DISMISS Plaintiffs NNDJ, Inc., Mary Eghigian, Janet Terterian, Amy Dluzynski, and Ezgar Villarreal (collectively Plaintiffs ) filed this class action law suit against National City Bank, Comerica Incorporated, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.( JPMorgan Chase ) and Fifth Thirds Bank (collectively the Banks ) alleging that the Banks violate the UCC, as enacted in Michigan, by issuing official checks and subsequently charging non-accountholders a fee to cash them. Defendants National City Bank and JPMorgan Chase (collectively the National Banks ) have brought a motion to dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the reasons set forth below, I GRANT the National Banks motion to dismiss. 1

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 2 of 8 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND National City Bank and JPMorgan Chase are federally chartered national banks created under and governed by the National Bank Act, 12 U.S.C. 21 et seq ( NBA ). The National Banks issue official checks in the form of cashier s checks or teller s checks. A cashier s check is a draft with respect to which the drawer and the drawee are the same bank or branches of the same bank. UCC 3-104(g). A teller s check is a draft drawn by a bank (I) on another bank, or (ii) payable at or through a bank. UCC 3-104(h). The National Banks charge nonaccountholder customers a fee to cash official checks that the National Banks themselves have issued. The fee generally ranges from five to ten dollars. Plaintiffs have filed this class action lawsuit alleging that the Banks violate UCC 3-412, 3-413, and 3-414, as adopted in Michigan, 1 by issuing official checks and subsequently charging non-accountholders a fee to cash them. The National Banks have filed a FRCP 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. They base their motion on alternative grounds. First, the National Banks argue that the sections of the UCC in question do not prohibit banks from charging non-accountholders a fee to cash official checks. In the alternative, the National Banks argue that if sections of the UCC are interpreted to prohibit the National Banks from charging non-accountholders a fee to cash official checks, those state law provisions are preempted by the NBA. ANALYSIS A. Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6) 1 UCC 3-412, 3-413, and 3-414 as adopted by the state of Michigan appear at MCL 440.3412, 440.3413, 440.3414. 2

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 3 of 8 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), a party defending a claim may bring a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the party bringing the claim must plead factual allegations that raise a right to relief above the speculative level, on the assumption that all of the allegations in the complaint are true. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombley, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 964-65, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). If the party bringing the claim does not plead factual allegations that if proven would raise a right to relief above the speculative level, dismissal is proper. See Id. B. The National Banks Grounds for Dismissal In deciding the National Banks motion, I am presented with two matters of first impression. The first is whether UCC 3-412, 3-413, or 3-414 prohibit banks from issuing official checks and subsequently charging non-accountholders a fee to cash them. The second poses a related question: if UCC 3-412, 3-413, or 3-414 are interpreted to prohibit the National Banks from charging non-accountholders a fee to cash official checks, are those state law provisions preempted by the NBA. I will consider the preemption question first. 1. Perception of State Law by the National Bank Act a. Federal Preemption A fundamental principle of the Constitution is that Congress has the power to preempt state law. Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Counsel, 530 U.S. 363, 372, 120 S.Ct. 2288 (2000). A congressional act preempts state law if the act contains an express preemption provision, if Congress intends for the act to occupy a field exclusively, or if the act comes into direct conflict with state law. See Spreistma v. Mercury Marine, a Div. Of Brunswick Corp., 537 3

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 4 of 8 U.S. 51, 64, 123 S.Ct 518 (2002). Conflict preemption occurs when it is it is impossible for a private party to comply with both state and federal requirements or where state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress. Id. at 64-65. (quotations and citations omitted). The National Banks argue that if sections of the UCC, as adopted in Michigan, are interpreted to prohibit National Banks from charging nonaccountholders a fee to cash official checks, those sections come into direct conflict with powers granted to the National Banks by the NBA. b. The National Bank Act In 1864, Congress enacted the NBA, establishing the system of national banking that is still in place today. Waters v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 127 S.Ct. 1559, 1566, 167 L.Ed.2d 389 (2007). The NBA grants national banks a list of enumerated powers as well as all such incidental powers as shall be necessary to carry on the business of banking. 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh). Under the NBA, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) bears primary responsibility for the surveillance of the business of banking as authorized by 24 Seventh. Nationsbank of North Carolina, N.A. v. Variable Annunity Life Ins. Co., 513 U.S. 251, 257, 115 S.Ct. 810, 130 L.Ed.2d 740 (1995)(citation omitted). In fulfilling this responsibility, the OCC has issued a regulation addressing a national bank s authority to charge fees. A national bank may charge its customers non-interest charges and fees, including deposit account service charges. 12 C.F.R. 7.4002(a). The OCC has clarified the meaning of this regulation by issuing an interpretive letter explaining that the term customer as used in 12 C.F.R. 7.4002(a) simply means any party that receives a product or service from the bank. Comptroller of the Currency, Interpretive Letter #934, p.2 n.5 (Docket Entry #33, Response to 4

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 5 of 8 Motion, Exhibit #2). The National Banks claim that 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 12 C.F.R. 7.4002(a), grant them the authority to charge non-accountholder customers fees for cashing official checks. c. The OCC Letters The Supreme Court has stated that the OCC s construction of the NBA should be given great weight. It is settled that courts should give great weight to any reasonable construction of a regulatory statute adopted by the agency charged with the enforcement of that statute. The Comptroller of the Currency is charged with the enforcement of banking laws to an extent that warrants the invocation of this principle with respect to his deliberate conclusions as to the meaning of these laws. NationsBank of N.C., N.A. v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 513 U.S. 251, 256-57 (1995) (quoting Clarke v. Sec. Indus. Ass n, 479 U.S. 388, 403-04(1987)). Shortly before the hearing on this motion, Counsel for JPMorgan Chase wrote to the OCC requesting confirmation...that JPMorgan Chase N.A. is authorized pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 12 C.F.R. 7.4002 to establish and charge a fee to a non-accountholder customer for the service of cashing an official check. The OCC responded in a letter dated February 27, 2008. Based on our review of your letter and supporting materials and the relevant considerations set forth in our regulations, we confirm that the Bank may establish and charge an official check cashing fee to a non-accountholder customer pursuant to Section 24(Seventh) and section 7.4002. Letter from the Comptroller of the Currency, February 27, 2008, p. 1 (Docket Entry # 39). In addition, the OCC noted that the authority of the Bank to charge particular fees is not conditioned on obtaining an individual confirmation opinion from the OCC; national banks are authorized to charge non-interest fees and charges as an inherent 5

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 6 of 8 element of their authority to conduct the business of banking. Id. at p.1, n.1. On February 28, 2008, Plaintiffs Counsel wrote the OCC. The OCC responded with a letter dated February 29, 2008. In the letter, the OCC specifically addressed Plaintiffs Counsel s claim that the OCC letter dated February 27, 2008 was not official. First, the statement made in your letter and incorrectly attributed to me - that the OCC s letter opining on the authority of a national bank to charge a fee for cashing certain checks is not official - is wrong. The letter is a formal legal opinion of the OCC s most senior legal officer. Letter from the Comptroller of the Currency, February 29, 2008, p.1 (Docket Entry # 41, Exhibit 1). d. Conclusion The NBA grants national banks the powers necessary to carry on the business of banking. 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh). The OCC has reasonably interpreted this grant of powers to include the authority of national banks to charge their customers fees. 12 C.F.R. 7.4002(a); see Nationsbank, 513 U.S. at 256-57; Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843-845, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984). I find, therefore, that the National Banks practice of charging non-accountholder customers a fee to cash official checks is an exercise of the authority granted to national banks by the NBA. In the OCC s letter, dated February 27, 2008, the OCC s most senior legal officer reached the same conclusion. Letter from the Comptroller of the Currency, February 27, 2008, p. 1 (Docket Entry # 39). Because the NBA grants the National Banks the authority to charge non-accountholder customers a fee to cash official checks, state laws that prohibit them from doing so stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment of Congress s objectives and are, therefore, preempted. See Spreistma, 537 U.S. at 64. For these reasons, I hold that if UCC 3-412, 3-413, and 3-414, as 6

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 7 of 8 adopted in Michigan, are interpreted to prohibit the National Banks from charging nonaccountholder customers a fee to cash official checks, they are preempted by the NBA. If UCC 3-412, 3-413, and 3-414 are interpreted to allow the National Banks to charge non-accountholder customers a fee to cash official checks, Plaintiffs factual allegations do not raise a right to relief. If UCC 3-412, 3-413, or 3-414 are interpreted to prohibit the National Banks from charging non-accountholder customers a fee to cash official checks, those sections are preempted by the NBA, and Plaintiffs factual allegations do not raise a right to relief. I, therefore, find that regardless of how UCC 3-412, 3-413, and 3-414 are interpreted, Plaintiffs have not stated a claim upon which relief can be granted. 2. Interpretation of UCC 3-412, 3-413, and 3-414 Because dismissal is appropriate on preemption grounds, I need not decide at this time whether UCC 3-412, 3-413, or 3-414 prohibit banks from charging a fee to cash official checks. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, I find that Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, I grant the National Banks motion to dismiss. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: March 21, 2008 s/john Feikens United States District Judge 7

Case 2:07-cv-14406-JF-SDP Document 45 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 8 of 8 Proof of Service I hereby certify that the foregoing order was served on the attorneys/parties of record on March 21, 2008, by U.S. first class mail or electronic means. s/carol Cohron Case Manager 8