12 C.F.R. § 4.31

Purpose and scope

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Purpose. The purposes of this subpart are to:

(1) Afford an orderly mechanism for the OCC to process expeditiously requests for non-public OCC information; to address the release of non-public OCC information without a request; and, when appropriate, for the OCC to assert evidentiary privileges in litigation;

(2) Recognize the public's interest in obtaining access to relevant and necessary information and the countervailing public interest of maintaining the effectiveness of the OCC supervisory process and appropriate confidentiality of OCC supervisory information;

(3) Ensure that the OCC's information is used in a manner that supports the public interest and the interests of the OCC;

(4) Ensure that OCC resources are used in the most efficient manner consistent with the OCC's statutory mission;

(5) Minimize burden on national banks, Federal savings associations, the public, and the OCC;

(6) Limit the expenditure of government resources for private purposes; and

(7) Maintain the OCC's impartiality among private litigants.

(b) Scope. (1) This subpart applies to requests for, and dissemination of, non-public OCC information, including requests for records or testimony arising out of civil lawsuits and administrative proceedings to which the OCC is not a party and the release of non-public OCC information without a specific request. Lawsuits and administrative proceedings to which the OCC is not a party include proceedings in which a Federal agency is a party in opposition to the private requester.

(2) This subpart does not apply to:

(i) A request for a record or testimony in a proceeding in which the OCC is a party; or

(ii) A request for a record that is required to be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), as described in § 4.12.

(3) A request for a record or testimony made by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, a government agency of the United States or a foreign government, a state agency with authority to investigate violations of criminal law, or a state bank or state savings association regulatory agency is governed solely by § 4.37(c).

(4) For purposes of §§ 4.35(a)(1), 4.36(a) and 4.37(c) of this part, the OCC's decision to disclose records or testimony involving a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) filed pursuant to the regulations implementing 12 U.S.C. 5318(g), or any information that would reveal the existence of a SAR, is governed by 12 CFR 21.11(k).

(5) This subpart does not apply to requests for non-public information filed with the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) before July 21, 2011. These requests are subject to the rules of the OTS in effect on July 20, 2011.

[60 FR 57322, Nov. 15, 1995, as amended at 63 FR 62929, Nov. 10, 1998; 64 FR 29216, June 1, 1999; 75 FR 75576, Dec. 3, 2010; 76 FR 43562, July 21, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Cotton v. PrivateBank & Trust Co., 235 F. Supp. 2d 809 (N.D. Ill. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cotton v. PrivateBank & Trust Co., 235 F. Supp. 2d 809 (N.D. Ill. 2002). “The Court observed that the Code of Federal Regulations, specifically 12 C.F.R. § 4.31 et seq., provides a mechanism for litigants to request the OCC to provide them with access to SARs.”

Wultz v. Bank of China Ltd., 61 F. Supp. 3d 272 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “10 The OCC’s Touhy regulations appear at 12 C.F.R. §§ 4.31 et seq. The parties’ submissions do not clearly distinguish between the governing law in the Second Circuit and elsewhere.”

Union Bank of California, N.A. v. Superior Court, 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5259 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “( 12 C.F.R. § 4.31 et seq. (2005).) The OCC has sole discretion whether to grant a request.”

Bizcapital Bus. & Indus. Dev. Corp. v. Off. of Comptroller of the Currency of the United States, 406 F. Supp. 2d 688 (E.D. La. 2005). · cites it 5× “1 In order to balance the interest in confidentiality embodied by the privilege and private litigants’ legitimate needs for nonpublic documents, the OCC has promulgated regulations governing the means by which private litigants may obtain OCC materials.”

Hasie v. Off. of the Comptroller of the Currency of the United States, 633 F.3d 361 (5th Cir. 2011). “417 (1951) (approving federal agencies' use of regulations to govern administrative requests for production of agency documents and testimony); 12 C.F.R. § 4.31 et seq. 3 . 5 U.S.C. § 706 .”

Raffa v. Wachovia Corp., 242 F. Supp. 2d 1223 (M.D. Fla. 2002). “See 12 C.F.R. § 4.31 et seq. The Regulations define such information as confidential and non-public, even if in the lawful possession of another individual or entity.”

Colonial Bancgroup, Inc v. Pricewaterhousecoopsers LLP, 110 F. Supp. 3d 37 (D.D.C. 2015). “Crowe’s explanation for this failure is that, because the agencies said they would never agree to any depositions concerning the Interagency Policy Statement, sending a formal letter “seemed an exercise in inevitable futility.”

Wuliger v. Off. of the Comptroller of Currency, 394 F. Supp. 2d 1009 (N.D. Ohio 2005). · cites it 2× “As noted in the regulations, a purpose of the OCC’s administrative procedure is to: Afford an orderly mechanism for the OCC to process expeditiously requests for non-public OCC information; to address the release of non-public OCC information without a request; and when…”

Corporación Pública para la Supervisión y Seguro de Cooperativas v. González López, 10 T.C.A. 740 (2004). “The Court observed that the Code of Federal Regulations, specifically 12 C.F.R. § 4.31 et seq., provides a mechanism for litigants to request the OCC to provide them with access to SARs.”

Stevens v. Flagstar Bank, Nat'l Ass'n (S.D. Miss. 2025). “Flagstar says that, under 12 C.F.R. §§ 4.31 , et seq., all “non-public OCC information remains the property of the OCC” and may not be disclosed “without the prior written permission of the OCC.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.