Full text
Case: 24-2355, 04/20/2026, DktEntry: 86.1, Page 1 of 6
No. 24-2355
__________________________________________________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PAYSERVICES BANK,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO,
Defendant-Appellee.
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
No. 1:23-cv-00305-REP
Hon. Raymond E. Patricco, Jr.
RESPONSE TO PAYSERVICES’ SEALED DOCUMENTS
(REDACTED)
Jonathan K. Youngwood
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
425 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 455-3539
jyoungwood@stblaw.com
Attorney for Appellee Federal Reserve
Bank of San Francisco
Case: 24-2355, 04/20/2026, DktEntry: 86.1, Page 2 of 6
Defendant-Appellee Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“FRBSF”)
hereby responds to Plaintiff-Appellant PayServices Bank’s (“PayServices”) April 2,
2026 Motion to Submit Sealed Documents. ECF No. 77.1 (the “Motion to Submit
Sealed Documents”).
FRBSF submits this brief to respond to PayServices’ statement in its Motion
to Submit Sealed Documents that it filed the documents in order to “obtain a final
decision from this Court.” ECF No. 77.1 at 2. FRBSF respectfully submits that this
appeal should remain in abeyance because the administrative appeal referenced in
this Court’s January 24, 2025 order has not yet been resolved.
On October 16, 2024, the Idaho Department of Finance terminated
PayServices’ preliminary approval to operate a bank in Idaho. PayServices did not
stop using “PayServices Bank” and, in response, the Idaho Department issued a
cease and desist Order directing PayServices immediately to stop using “bank” in its
name (the “Cease-and-Desist Order”).1
PayServices appealed the rescission of its preliminary approval to an Idaho
administrative law judge.2 And, on January 24, 2025, this Court held the case “in
1
See Cease and Desist Issued to PayServices, Idaho Dep.’t of Fin.,
https://www.finance.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/legal/administrative-
actions/financial-institutions/documents/Cease-Desist-Order-Payservices.pdf (last
visited
2
Apr. 7, 2026).
FRBSF does not have access to documents and information relating to
PayServices’ administrative appeal outside of those provided to the Court by
PayServices.
Case: 24-2355, 04/20/2026, DktEntry: 86.1, Page 3 of 6
abeyance pending the outcome” of PayServices’ administrative appeal and ordered
PayServices “upon the resolution of PayServices’ administrative appeal” to file,
among other things, “any explanation provided by the Idaho Department of
Finance.” ECF No. 52.1 (emphasis added).
On November 18, 2025, PayServices notified this Court that the Idaho
Department of Finance’s rescission of PayServices’ preliminary approval to operate
a bank in Idaho had been reversed pending remand as effected by orders dated
September 8 (“Sep. 8 Order”) and November 5 (“Nov. 5 Order”) (together, “ALJ
Orders”). ECF No. 65.1. On November 24, 2025, the Court directed PayServices
to file copies of the ALJ Orders. ECF No. 67.1.
On April 2, 2026, PayServices filed the ALJ Orders pursuant to the Motion to
Seal, claiming in part that it was doing so in order to obtain a final decision in this
matter. ECF No. 77.1. However, the ALJ Orders do not resolve PayServices’
administrative appeal or provide an “explanation provided by the Idaho Department
of Finance” as to the resolution of PayServices’ administrative appeal, as directed in
the Court’s January 24, 2025 order. ECF No. 52.1.
Specifically, the Sep. 8 Order remanded the case to the Idaho Department of
Finance to
ECF No. 77.1 at 21 (Sep. 8 Order at 7).
2
Case: 24-2355, 04/20/2026, DktEntry: 86.1, Page 4 of 6
Further, while the Nov. 5 Order
ECF No. 77.1 at 27 (Nov. 5 Order at 3).
Thus, the outcome of PayServices’ administrative appeal remains pending
until the Idaho Department of Finance makes a final determination on remand.
Accordingly, the condition identified by this Court for lifting abeyance—“the
outcome” or “resolution” of the administrative appeal—has not yet been satisfied.
See ECF No. 52.1. For those reasons, FRBSF respectfully submits that this case
should remain in abeyance until the Idaho Department of Finance completes the
remand proceedings and issues a final ruling in PayServices’ administrative appeal.
3
Case: 24-2355, 04/20/2026, DktEntry: 86.1, Page 5 of 6
Date: April 8, 2026
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
/s/ Jonathan K. Youngwood
Jonathan K. Youngwood
Attorney for Appellee Federal Reserve
Bank of San Francisco
4
Case: 24-2355, 04/20/2026, DktEntry: 86.1, Page 6 of 6
CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 20th day of April, 2026, I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system.
s/ Jonathan K. Youngwood
Jonathan K. Youngwood
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
425 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 455-3539
jyoungwood@stblaw.com
Attorney for Appellee Federal Reserve
Bank of San Francisco