Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 1 of 20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No. V. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ) ) CADENCE BANK, N.A, ) ) Defendant. )
COMPLAINT
INTRODUCTION
1. The United States of America brings this action against Cadence
Bank, N.A. ("Cadence Bank," "Cadence," or the "Bank") under the Fair Housing
Act ("FHA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act
("ECOA"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1691-1691f.
2. The FHA and ECOA prohibit creditors, such as banks, from
discriminating in home loans or other residential credit transactions on the basis
of race, color, national origin, and other characteristics.
3. "Redlining" is one type of discrimination prohibited under the FHA
and ECOA. Redlining occurs when lenders deny or discourage applications or
1 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 2 of 20
avoid providing loans and other credit services in neighborhoods based on the race, color, or national origin of the residents of those neighborhoods.
4. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank engaged in a pattern or
practice ofunlawful redlining. As alleged in detail herein, the Bank avoided
providing home loans and other home mortgage services in majority-Black and
Hispanic neighborhoods in and around Houston, Texas.
5. Cadence Bank's redlining practices included locating and maintaining nearly all its branches and all its loan officers in majority-white
neighborhoods. The Bank also concentrated its outreach, advertising, and
marketing in majority-white neighborhoods and avoided majority-Black and
Hispanic ones. As a result of these practices, the Bank generated
disproportionately low numbers of loan applications and home loans from
majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in Houston compared to similarly
situated lenders.
6. Cadence Bank's conduct and practices were intended to deny, and
had the effect of denying, residents of majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods equal access to home loans and otherwise discouraged these
residents from applying for home loans. The Bank's conduct was not justified by
a business necessity and was not necessary to achieve a substantial, legitimate,
2 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 3 of 20
non-discriminatory interest.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action under 28
U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1345, 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a), and 15 U.S.C. § 1691e(h) because the action arises under the laws of the United States, and the United
States brings this case as a plaintiff.
8. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a)-(b) because
Cadence's principal place of business is located within this judicial district.
PARTIES
9. Plaintiff the United States brings this action to enforce the provisions
of the FHA and ECOA. The FHA and ECOA authorize the Attorney General to
bring a civil action in federal district court whenever he has reason to believe that
an entity is engaged in a pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of rights secured by the FHA and ECOA. 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a); 15 U.S.C. §
1691e(h). The FHA further authorizes the Attorney General to bring suit where
the defendant has denied rights to a group of persons and that denial raises an
issue of general public importance. 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a).
10. Defendant Cadence Bank, N.A. is a full-service bank headquartered
in Atlanta, Georgia, and it operates 98 branches throughout Alabama, Florida,
3 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 4 of 20
Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Texas. The Bank currently operates 11
branches in the Houston area. As of September 30, 2020, Cadence's total assets
equaled $18.4 billion. From 2012 to 2019, mortgage lending in the Houston area
alone accounted for 40 percent of Cadence's total home mortgage business.
11 . Cadence Bank is subject to the regulatory authority of the Office of
the Comptroller of the Currency ("OCC"). Because its assets exceed $10 billion,
Cadence Bank is also regulated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
12. Cadence Bank is subject to the FHA, ECOA, and their respective
implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. pt. 100, 12 C.F.R. pt. 1002.
13 . Cadence Bank is a "creditor" within the meaning of ECOA, 15
U.S.C. § 1691a(e), and is engaged in "residential real estate-related
transactions" under the FHA, 42 U.S.C. § 3605.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Cadence Bank's Houston Assessment Area
14. With over seven million residents as of 2019, the Houston
Metropolitan Statistical Area ("MSA") is the fifth most populous region of the
country and also one of the most diverse. No racial or ethnic group accounts for a
majority of the population. According to data from the United States Census
Bureau, in 2018, the region was 37.6 percent Hispanic, 35.5 percent non-Hispanic
4 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 5 of 20
white ("white"), and 17 percent non-Hispanic Black ("Black"). Fifty-two percent
of census tracts in the Houston MSA are majority-Black and Hispanic. As used in
this Complaint, a "majority-Black and Hispanic" tract is one where more than 50
percent of the residents are identified as either "Black or African American" or
"Hispanic or Latino" by the United States Census Bureau. 1
15. As a depository bank, Cadence is subject to the requirements of the
Community Reinvestment Act, 12 U.S.C. §§ 2901-2908, and its enabling regulations, which require most banks to meet the credit needs of the communities
that they serve. Each bank self-identifies the communities that it serves in what
are called the bank's "assessment areas." Federal regulators look at a bank's
assessment area in evaluating whether an institution is meeting the credit needs of
its entire community.
16. Cadence Bank's self-designated assessment area in Houston
("Houston assessment area" or "assessment area") consists of three contiguous
counties where 87 percent of the Houston MSA's population resides: Fort Bend,
Harris, and Montgomery.
1 The complaint uses "majority-Black and Hispanic census tract" "majority-Black and Hispanic area" and "majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhood" interchangeably. The complaint does the same for "majority-white tract," "majority-white area" and "majority-white neighborhood."
5 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 6 of 20
17. Fifty-six percent of the census tracts in Cadence's Houston
assessment area, or 517 tracts, are majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts. See
Ex. A. In addition, 17 percent of Harris County residents, 6 percent of Fort Bend
County residents, and 8 percent ofMontgomery County residents - totaling over
700,000 people - are Spanish-speaking with limited English proficiency.
Cadence Bank's Houston-Area Branches Are Concentrated in Majority-White Neighborhoods
18. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank's branches in the Houston
MSA were located to serve the credit needs of residents in majority-white neighborhoods and to avoid serving the credit needs of residents in majority
Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. See Ex. A.
19. From 2013 through 201 7, more than half of the census tracts in the
Bank's Houston assessment area - 56 percent- were majority-Black and
Hispanic. Despite the racial composition of its assessment area, only one of the
Bank's 13 branches open during that time period was located in a majority-Black
and Hispanic neighborhood. The remaining 12 branches were located in majority-white neighborhoods. See Ex. A.
20. Cadence Bank knew its branches were not serving the credit needs of
majority-Black and Hispanic areas but did not take steps to address this failure for years. Cadence entered the Houston market in 2012, opening one branch in a
6 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 7 of 20
majority-white neighborhood. Later that year, Cadence acquired Encore Bank
and its 12 branches, all but one of which were located in majority-white neighborhoods.
21. The Bank's only branch in a majority-Black and Hispanic area was
located in a downtown business district where the branch was intended to serve
commuting workers rather than residents. By 2017, this area had become
majority-white due to demographic change.
22. Thus, according to United States Census Bureau data, by 2017, all of
the Bank's branches were located in majority-white areas, and not one branch was
located in a majority-Black and Hispanic area.
23. Cadence Bank did not open a branch in a majority-Black and
Hispanic area until 2018, six years after it entered the Houston market, and then
only after the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates
Cadence, began a fair lending examination of the Bank.
24. By concentrating nearly all of its branches in majority-white areas,
Cadence Bank discouraged residents who lived in majority-Black and Hispanic
areas from applying for and obtaining home loans and restricted their access to
credit.
7 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 8 of 20
Cadence Bank's Loan Officers Served Majority-White Neighborhoods but Not Majority-Black and Hispanic Neighborhoods in Houston
25. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank's loan officers served the
credit needs of majority-white neighborhoods but did not serve the credit needs of majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in its Houston assessment area.
26. Cadence Bank relied primarily on its loan officers to generate loans
and serve the credit needs of residents in its assessment area.
27. Cadence Bank's loan officers were assigned to, or worked out of, the
Bank's 13 branches, all but one of which was located in a majority-white area.
The Bank's loan officers generated the majority of home loan applications and made the majority of home loans in the areas immediately surrounding its
branches.
28. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank assigned loan officers so
that most branches in majority-white areas had one or more loan officers. The
Bank did not assign a single loan officer, even on a part-time basis, to the lone
branch located in a majority-Black and Hispanic area.
29. If a resident or prospective borrower in that majority-Black and
Hispanic area wanted to apply for a home loan from Cadence at the local branch,
he or she would have to make an appointment in advance to meet with a loan
8 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 9 of 20
officer there. This was an additional step that customers at most other branches -
all of which were in majority-white neighborhoods - were not required to take.
30. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank did not employ or hire loan
officers with ties or relationships to majority-Black and Hispanic areas or with the requisite Spanish language skills necessary to provide credit services to residents
in some of these areas.
31. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank did not direct or train its
loan officers or other staff to take steps to serve the credit needs of majority-Black
and Hispanic areas.
Cadence Bank's Outreach and Marketing Targeted Majority-White Neighborhoods and Not Majority-Black and Hispanic Neighborhoods in Houston
32. From 2013 through 2017, Cadence Bank did almost no outreach and
marketing to majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in its assessment area
and instead concentrated its outreach and marketing in majority-white neighborhoods.
33. During this time, Cadence Bank relied almost entirely on its network
of branches and loan officers to conduct outreach and marketing to the
surrounding areas. The Bank's loan officers, all of whom worked in branches in
majority-white neighborhoods, conducted outreach and marketing by seeking
9 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 10 of 20
referrals from real estate agents, builders, and developers in the surrounding area.
34. Aside from purchasing two advertisements in a local newspaper
serving the Black community, Cadence Bank took no meaningful steps to
encourage applications from outside of its branch network or from majority-Black
and Hispanic areas. Nor did the Bank market or conduct outreach in these areas.
35. Cadence Bank neither directed nor trained its loan officers to
increase their sources of referrals from majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.
36. Cadence Bank did not advertise at all in Spanish.
Disproportionately Low Numbers of Home Loan Applications from Majority Black and Hispanic Neighborhoods in Houston
37. Cadence Bank's policies and practices alleged herein- including
the concentration of nearly all its branches, loan officers, marketing, and outreach
in majority-white neighborhoods - have discouraged applicants in majority-Black
and Hispanic neighborhoods in its Houston assessment area from applying for and
obtaining home loans and other mortgage-related services.
38. Cadence Bank's own data on loan applications and originations that
it is required to report to regulators under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of
1975 ("HMDA"), 12 U.S.C. §§ 2801-2811, confirms that Cadence Bank has
10 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 11 of 20
avoided serving majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in its Houston
assessment area.
39. Between 2013 and 2017, Cadence Bank significantly underperformed its "peer lenders" in generating home mortgage applications from majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. "Peer lenders" are similarly-situated
financial institutions that received between 50 percent and 200 percent of the
Bank's annual volume of home mortgage loan applications.
40. The disparity between the rate of applications generated by Cadence
and the rate generated by its peer lenders from majority-Black and Hispanic
neighborhoods was both statistically significant - meaning unlikely to be caused
by chance - and sizable across the five-year time period from 2013 through 2017.
41. Specifically, of the nearly 1,600 HMDA-reportable mortgage
applications Cadence generated for single-family dwellings from 2013 through
2017 in the Houston assessment area, 14 percent came from residents of majority
Black and Hispanic areas. By contrast, the Bank's peers generated 36 percent of
their nearly 128,000 applications from these same majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.
42. In other words, from 2013 through 2017, the Bank's peer lenders
generated applications from majority-Black and Hispanic areas at more than 2.5
11 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 12 of 20
times the rate of Cadence Bank. And when disparities were calculated for
individual years, the Bank's peers generated applications at a rate between
approximately 1.5 times and 8.3 times the rate of Cadence, depending on the year.
These disparities are statistically significant across the five-year period and in
every year analyzed.
43. Even when Cadence generated applications from majority-Black and
Hispanic tracts, the applicants themselves were disproportionately white. From
2013 to 2017, the majority - 54 percent - of the loan applications Cadence drew
from majority-Black-and-Hispanic neighborhoods were from white applicants;
only 36 percent were from Black or Hispanic applicants.
44. The statistically significant disparities between applications Cadence
Bank generated from majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods and those that
its peers generated show that there were residents in majority-Black and Hispanic
areas in Houston who were seeking home loans. Cadence had no legitimate, non
discriminatory reason to draw so few applications from these areas.
45. These data show a statistically significant failure by Cadence Bank to
draw applications for home loans and provide residential mortgage services to residents of majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods on a non-discriminatory
basis when compared with similar lenders from 2013 through 2017.
12 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 13 of 20
Disproportionately Low Numbers of Home Loans Made in Majority-Black and Hispanic Neighborhoods
46. Cadence Bank's lending practices as alleged herein have discouraged
applicants in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods from seeking home
loans. As a result, the Bank made a smaller percentage ofHMDA-reportable
residential mortgage loans in these neighborhoods compared to its peers between
2013 and 2017.
47. From 2013 to 201 7, Cadence Bank made approximately 1, 110
HMDA-reportable residential mortgage loans for single-family dwellings in its
Houston assessment area. Of those loans, 14 percent were made to residents of majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts. By contrast, Cadence Bank's peers
made nearly 78,000 HMDA-reportable residential mortgage loans in the same
area, of which 32 percent went to residents of majority-Black and Hispanic census
tracts.
48. In other words, from 2013 through 2017, the Bank's peer lenders
made home loans from majority-Black and Hispanic areas at more than 2.3 times
the rate of Cadence Bank. When disparities were calculated for individual years,
Cadence Bank's peers made loans at a rate between approximately 1.4 times and
5.3 times the rate of Cadence Bank, depending on the year. The disparities are
statistically significant across the five-year period, and for each individual year
13 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 14 of 20
from 2013 through 2017.
49. Furthermore, of the loans Cadence Bank made in majority-Black and
Hispanic areas, the majority - 59 percent - went to white borrowers, while only
33 percent went to Black and Hispanic borrowers.
50. The statistically significant disparities between the number of home loans Cadence Bank made from majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods and those that its peers made show that there were residents in majority-Black and
Hispanic areas in Houston who were seeking and qualified for home loans.
Cadence had no legitimate, non-discriminatory reason to make so few home loans from these areas.
51. These data show a statistically significant failure by Cadence Bank to make home loans and provide residential mortgage services to residents in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods on a non-discriminatory basis when compared with similar lenders from 2013 through 2017.
OCC's Referral and the United States' Investigation
52. In October 2017, Cadence Bank's prudential regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, initiated a fair lending examination of the Bank focused on redlining.
53. After completing its examination and statistical analyses, the OCC
14 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 15 of 20
concluded that, between 2014 and 2016, Cadence Bank had likely "engaged in a
violation of the Fair Housing Act" because its "mortgage operations in Houston
were structured to avoid providing access to credit to residents seeking first-lien
mortgage loans in majority-minority census tracts" in its Houston assessment
area.
54. By correspondence dated January 30, 2019, the OCC referred this
matter to the United States Department of Justice.
55. On April 4, 2019, the United States notified Cadence Bank that it
was opening an investigation into whether the Bank had engaged in unlawful
redlining in violation of the FHA and ECOA and requested documents related to
Cadence's lending practices for the time period January 1, 2014, to the present.
56. Cadence Bank's discriminatory practices as described herein have
intended to discriminate and have had the effect of discriminating on the basis of race, color, and national origin.
COUNT I-DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, AND NATIONAL ORIGIN
57. The United States incorporates all prior paragraphs of the Complaint
as if fully set forth herein.
58. Persons who have been victims of Cadence Bank's discriminatory
15 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 16 of 20
policies and practices are "aggrieved" as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 3602(i) and 15
U.S.C. § 1691e(i), and may have suffered damages as a result of the Bank's
conduct in violation of both the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act, as described above.
59. Defendant Cadence Bank's actions as alleged herein constitute:
a. Discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin
in making available residential real estate-related transactions,
or in the terms or conditions of residential real estate-related
transactions, in violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.
§ 3605(a), and its implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R.
§ 100.ll0(b), 24 C.F.R. § 100.120(a)-(b), and 24 C.F.R.
§ 100.50(b)(l)-(3);
b. Discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin
in the terms, conditions, or privileges of the sale or rental of
dwellings, or the provision of services or facilities in
connection with the sale or rental of dwellings, in violation of
the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b), and its
implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. § 100.50(b)(l)-(3);
c. The making unavailable or denial of dwellings to persons
16 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 17 of 20
because of race, color, and national origin, in violation of the
Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a), and its implementing
regulations, 24 C.F.R. § 100.50(b)(l}-(3); and
d. Discrimination against applicants with respect to credit
transactions on the basis of race, color, and national origin and
discouragement of applications on the basis of race, color, and
national origin in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity
Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 169l(a)(l), 1691e(g), and its implementing
regulations, 12 C.F.R. pt. 1002.
COUNT II-PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF DISCRIMINATION AND DENIAL OF RIGHTS TO A GROUP OF PERSONS
60. The United States incorporates all prior paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
61. Persons who have been victims of Cadence Bank's discriminatory policies and practices are "aggrieved" as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 3602(i) and 15
U.S.C. § 169le(i), and may have suffered damages as a result of the Bank's conduct in violation of both the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act, as described above.
62. Defendant Cadence Bank's policies and practices as alleged herein constitute:
17 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 18 of 20
a. A pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of
rights secured by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a),
and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1691e(h);
and
b. Unlawful discrimination and a denial of rights granted by the
Fair Housing Act to a group ofpersons that raises an issue of
general public importance within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.
§ 3614(a).
63. The discriminatory policies and practices of Defendant Cadence
Bank have been intentional and willful, and implemented with reckless disregard for the rights of individuals based on their race, color, and national origin.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the United States prays that the Court enter an order that:
(1) Declares that the conduct of Defendant Cadence Bank violates the
Fair Housing Act;
(2) Declares that the Conduct of Defendant Cadence Bank violates the
Equal Credit Opportunity Act;
(3) Enjoins Defendant, its agents, employees, and successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from:
18 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 19 of 20
A. Discriminating on account of race, color or national origin in
any aspect of their lending business practices;
B. Discouraging applicants on account of race, color or national
ongm;
C. Failing or refusing to take such affirmative steps as may be
necessary to restore, as nearly as practicable, the victims of
Defendant's unlawful practices to the position they would be
in but for the discriminatory conduct;
D. Failing or refusing to take such affirmative steps as may be
necessary to prevent the recurrence of any discriminatory
conduct in the future and to eliminate, to the extent
practicable, the effects of Defendant's unlawful practices, and
providing policies and procedures to ensure all segments of
Defendant's market areas are served without regard to
prohibited characteristics;
(4) Awards monetary damages against Defendant in accordance with 42
U.S.C. § 3614(d)(l)(B) and 15 U.S.C. § 1691e(h);
(5) Assesses a civil penalty against Defendant in an amount authorized
by 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(l)(C), in order to vindicate the public interest; and
19 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675 Filed 08/30/21 Page 20 of 20
(6) Awards the United States any additional relief the interests ofjustice mayreqmre.
Dated: August 30, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
MERRICK B. GARLAND Attorney General KURT R. ERSKINE KRISTEN CLARKE Acting United States Attorney Assistant Attorney General Northern District of Georgia Civil Rights Division SAMEENA SHINA MAJEED Chief
Isl Marta Campos Isl Eliza H. Simon Isl Y. SooJo Isl Katharine F. Towt Y. SOOJO LUCY G. CARLSON Assistant United States Attorney Deputy Chief United States Attorney's Office MARTA CAMPOS Northern District of Georgia DC Bar 440680 75 Ted Turner Dr., S.W., Suite 600 ELIZA H. SIMON Atlanta, GA 30303 MD Bar (no bar number) Phone: (404) 581-6000 KATHARINE F. TOWT Fax: (404) 581-6181 MA Bar 690461 E-mail: [email protected] Trial Attorneys GA Bar 385817 Housing & Civil Enforcement Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW - 4CON Washington, DC 20530 Phone: (202) 514-4733 Fax: (202) 514-1116 E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America
20 Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675-1 Filed 08/30/21 Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A to Complaint . In United States of America v. Cadence Bank, N.A. Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675-1 Filed 08/30/21 Page 2 of 2
Cadence Bank Branches 2013 - 2017 Percent Black and Hispanic Population by Census Trac1 Cadence Bank CRA Assessment Area
H untsvrn e ')~ 5nd;t
Sa'h Jacinto
Grimes Sa,, t-bJ ton . 11onal Fo•at
42d ft Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNACDOC11rneot2-67~r;_~ EE;iled 08/30/21 Page 1 of 2 JS44 (Rev.10/2020 NDGA) .M:E" L OV.ER ~'HE T
The JS44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor snpplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket record. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ATTACHED)
I. (a) PLAINTIFF(S) DEFENDANT(S)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CADENCE BANK, N.A.
(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF______DEFENDANT GWINNETT (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED
(C) ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND ATTORNEYS (IFKNOWN) E-MAIL ADDRESS) Y. SooJo United States Attorney's Office 75 Ted Turner Drive, SW, Suite 600 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 404-581-6000 [email protected]
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (PLACE AN "X" IN ONE BOX ONLY) (PLACE AN "X" IN ONE BOX FOR PLAINTIFF AND ONE BOX FOR DEFENDAN1) (FOR DIVERSITY CASES ONLY)
PLF DEF PLF DEF '2il1 U.S. GOVERNMENT □ 3 FEDERAL QUESTION D1 D1 CITIZEN OF THIS STATE □ 4 □ 4 IN CORPORATED OR PRINCIPAL PLAINTIFF (U.S. GOVERNMENT NOT A PARTY) PLACE OF BUSINESS IN THIS STATE
D2 U.S. GOVERNMENT □ 4 DIVERSITY D2 D2 CITIZEN OF ANOTIIER STATED s Ds INCORPORATED AND PRINCIPAL DEFENDANT (INDICATE CITIZENSHIP OF PARTIES PLACE OF BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE IN ITEMill) CITIZEN OR SUBJECT OF A FOREIGN NATION □ 3 □ 3 FOREIGN COUNTRY □ 6 □ 6
IV. ORIGIN (PLACEAN"X"INONEBOXONLY) □ □ TRANSFERREDFROM □ MULTIDISTRICT □ APPEALTODISTRICTJUDGE [8]10RIGINAL D2 REMOVEDFROM □ 3REMANDEDFROM 4 REINSTATED OR 5 ANOTHER DISTRICT 6 LITIGATION- 7 FROM MAGISTRATE JUDGE PROCEEDING STATE COURT APPELLATE COURT REOPENED (Specify District) TRANSFER JUDGMENT
□ MULTIDISTRICT 8 LITIGATION· DIRECT FILE
V. CAUSE OF ACTION (CITETHEU.S.ClVILSTATUTEUNDERWHICHYOUAREFILINGANDWRITEABRIEFSTATEMENTOFCAUSE- DONOTCITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY)
The United States brings this action against Cadence Bank, N.A. under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3601-3619, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1691-1691f.
(IF COMPLEX, CHECK REASON BELOW) D 1. Unusually large number ofparties. D 6. Problems locating or preserving evidence D2. Unusually large number ofclaims or defenses. D 7. Pending parallel investigations or actions by government. D 3. Factual issues are exceptionally complex D 8. Multiple use ofexperts. D4. Greater than normal volume ofevidence. D 9. Need for discovery outside United States boundaries. D5. Extended discovery period is needed. Do. Existence of highly technical issues and proof.
CONTINUED ON REVERSE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # _____ AMOUNT$______APPLYING IFP _____ MAG. JUDGE (IFP) ______
JUDGE.______MAG. JUDGE _ ___,,...... ,.---,,-- NATURE OF SUIT___ _ CAUSE OF ACTION______(Ref erral) Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675-2 Filed 08/30/21 Page 2 of 2
VI. NATURE OF SUIT (PLACEAN"X"INONEBOXONLY) CONTRACT - "O" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK CIVIL RIGHTS - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK SOCIAL SECURITY - "O" MONTHS DISCOVERY 0 150 RECOVERY OF OVERPAYMENT & 440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS TRACK ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT 441 VOTING 861 HIA (1395fl) 0 152 RECOVERY OF DEFAUL TED STUDENT 442 EMPLOYMENT 862 BLACK LUNG (923) LOANS (Exel. Veterans) 443 HOUSING/ ACCOMMODATIONS 863 DIWC (405(g)) 0153RECOVERYOFOVERPAYMENTOF 445 AMERICANS with DISABILITIES - Employment 863 DIWW (405(g)) VETERAN'S BENEFITS 446 AMERICANS with DISABILITIES - Other 864 SSID TITLE XVI 0 448 EDUCATION B 865 RSI (405(g)) CONTRACT - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK 110 INSURANCE FEDERAL TAX SUITS - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY § 120MARINE IMMIGRATION - "O" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK TRACK 130 MILLER ACT 462 NATURALIZATION APPLICATION ---□-- 870 TAXES (U.S. Plaintiff or Defendant) 0 140 NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT B465 OTHER IMMIGRATION ACTIONS LJ 871 IRS - THIRD PARTY 26 USC 7609 151 MEDICARE ACT 160 STOCKHOLDERS' SUITS PRISONER PETITIONS - "O" MONTHS DISCOVERY OTHER STATUTES - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY ~ 190 OTHER CONTRACT TRACK TRACK 195 CONTRACT PRODUCT LIABILITY -~ 463 HABEAS CORPUS- Alien Detainee 375 FALSE CLAIMS ACT 196 FRANCHISE 510 MOTIONS TO VACATE SENTENCE 376 Qui Tam 31 USC 3729(a) 530 HABEAS CORPUS 400 STATE REAPPORTIONMENT REAL PROPERTY - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY 535 HABEAS CORPUS DEATH PENAL TY 430BANKSANDBANKING TRACK 540 MANDAMUS & OTHER 450 COMMERCE/ICC RA TES/ETC. -~210 LAND CONDEMNATION 550 CIVIL RIGHTS - Filed Pro se ~ 460DEPORTATION 220 FORECLOSURE 555 PRISON CONDIDON(S) - Filed Pro se 470 RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT 230 RENT LEASE & EJECTMENT 0 560 CIVIL DETAINEE: CONDITIONS OF ORGANIZATIONS 240 TORTS TO LAND CONFINEMENT 480 CONSUMER CREDIT 245 TORT PRODUCT LIABILITY 485 TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 290 ALL OTHER REAL PROPERTY PRISONER PETITIONS - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY 490 CABLE/SATELLITE TV TRACK 890 OTHER STATUTORY ACTIONS TORTS - PERSONAL INJURY - "4" MONTHS ----0 550 CNIL RIGHTS - Filed by Counsel 891 AGRICULTURAL ACTS DISCOVERY TRACK 0 555 PRISON CONDIDON(S) - Filed by Counsel 893 ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS 310 AIRPLANE 895 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 899 315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT LIABILITY FORFEITURE/PENALTY - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY ~ 899 ADMINISTRA TNE PROCEDURES ACT/ ~ 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL & SLANDER TRACK □ REVIEW OR APPEAL OF AGENCY DECISION 330 FEDERAL EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ---□ 625 DRUG RELATED SEIZURE OF PROPERTY □ 950 CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE STATUTES 21 USC 881 ;!~~PRODUCT LIABILITY 0 690OTHER OTHER STATUTES - "8" MONTHS DISCOVERY 350 MOTOR VEHICLE TRACK 355 MOTOR VEHICLE PRODUCT LIABILITY LABOR- "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK ~ 410 ANTITRUST 360 OTHER PERSONAL INJURY 0 710FAIRLABORSTANDARDSACT 362 PERSONAL INJURY - MEDICAL 720 LABOR/MGMT. RELATIONS B 850 SECURITIES/ COMMODITIES I EXCHANGE MALPRACTICE § 740RAILWAY LABOR ACT 0 365 PERSONAL INJURY - PRODUCT LIABILITY 751 FAMILY and MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OTHER STATUTES- "O" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK 367 790 OTHER LABOR LITIGATION □ p;~ru~t:~~~~ILITY B 79 1 EMPL. RET. INC. SECURITY ACT ---a- 896 ARBITRATION 0 368 ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY PRODUCT (Confirm / Vacate / Order / Modify) LIABILITY PROPERTY RIGHTS - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK TORTS - PERSONAL PROPERTY - "4" MONTHS ---0 820 COPYRIGHTS DISCOVERY TRACK 0 840 TRADEMARK * PLEASE NOTE DISCOVERY D 370 OTHER FRAUD 0 880 DEFEND TRADE SECRETS ACT OF 20 16 (DTSA) 371 TRUTH IN LENDING TRACK FOR EACH CASE §380 OTHER PERSONAL PROPERTY DAMAGE PROPERTY RIGHTS - "8" MONTHS DISCOVERY TYPE. SEE LOCAL RULE 26.3 385 PROPERTY DAMAGE PRODUCT LIABILITY TRACK ---□ 830PATENT BANKRUPTCY - "O" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK 422 APPEAL 28 USC 158 0 835 PATENT-ABBREVIATED NEW DRUG APPLICATIONS (ANDA) - a/k/a B423 WITHDRAWAL28 USC 157 Hatch-Waxman cases
VII. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: □ CHECK IF CLASS ACTION UNDER F.R.Civ.P. 23 DEMAND$------JURY DEMAND □ YES □ NO (CHECK YES ONLY IF DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT)
VIII. RELATED/REFILED CASE(S) IF ANY JUDGE______DOCKET NO.______
CIVIL CASES ARE DEEMED RELATED IF THE PENDING CASE INVOLVES: (CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX) 0 1. PROPERTY INCLUDED IN AN EARLIER NUMBERED PENDING SUIT. 0 2. SAME ISSUE OF FACT OR ARISES OUT OF THE SAME EVENT OR TRANSACTION INCLUDED IN AN EARLIER NUMBERED PENDING SUIT. 0 3. VALIDITY OR INFRINGEMENT OF THE SAME PATENT, COPYRIGHT OR TRADEMARK INCLUDED IN AN EARLIER NUMBERED PENDING SUIT. 0 4. APPEALS ARISING OUT OF THE SAME BANKRUPTCY CASE AND ANY CASE RELATED THERETO WHICH HAVE BEEN DECIDED BY THE SAME BANKRUPTCY JUDGE. 0 5. REPETITIVE CASES FILED BY PRO SE LITIGANTS. 0 6. COMPANION OR RELATED CASE TO CASE(S) BEING SIMULTANEOUSLY FILED (INCLUDE ABBREVIATED STYLE OF OTHER CASE(S)):
0 7. EITHER SAME OR ALL OF THE PARTIES AND ISSUES IN TIDS CASE WERE PREVIOUSLY INVOLVED IN CASE NO. ,WIDCHWAS DISMISSED. This case O IS O IS NOT ( check one box) SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME CASE.
August 30, 2021
DATE Case 1:21-mi-99999-UNA Document 2675-3 Filed 08/30/21 Page 1 of 1
AO 398 (Rev. 01/09) Notice ofa Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service ofa Summons
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) Plaintiff ) V. ) Civil Action No. CADENCE BANK, N.A. ) Defendant )
NOTICE OF A LAWSUIT AND REQUEST TO WAIVE SERVICE OF A SUMMONS
To: Jeffrey P. Naimon, Buckley, LLP, 2001 M. Street, N.W., Ste. 500, Washington, D.C. 20036 (Name ofthe defendant or - ifthe defendant is a corporation, partnership, or association - an officer or agent authorized to receive service)
Why are you getting this?
A lawsuit has been filed against you, or the entity you represent, in this court under the number shown above. A copy ofthe complaint is attached.
This is not a summons, or an official notice from the court. It is a request that, to avoid expenses, you waive formal service of a summons by signing and returning the enclosed waiver. To avoid these expenses, you must return the signed waiver within .6.Q__ days (give at least 30 days, or at least 60 days ifthe defendant is outside any judicial district ofthe United States) from the date shown below, which is the date this notice was sent. Two copies ofthe waiver form are enclosed, along with a stamped, self-addressed envelope or other prepaid means for returning one copy. You may keep the other copy.
What happens next?
Ifyou return the signed waiver, I will file it with the court. The action will then proceed as if you had been served on the date the waiver is filed, but no summons will be served on you and you will have 60 days from the date this notice is sent (see the date below) to answer the complaint (or 90 days if this notice is sent to you outside any judicial district of the United States).
Ifyou do not return the signed waiver within the time indicated, I will arrange to have the summons and complaint served on you. And I will ask the court to require you, or the entity you represent, to pay the expenses ofmaking service.
Please read the enclosed statement about the duty to avoid unnecessary expenses.
I certify that this request is being sent to you on the date below .
Date: August 30, 2021 . S&&ClD_____ Si iature ofthe ateft{,---;;;; or unrepresentedparty Y. Soo Jo Printed name U.S. Attorney's Office, 75 Ted Turner Drive, S.W., Suite 600, Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Address [email protected] E-mail address 404-581-6312 Telephone number