On March 7, 2022, in the aptly named case of Hurry v. FDIC, Judge Randolph D. Moss of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that the FDIC improperly avoided its statutory deadline to rule on an application (technically, a “notice”) to acquire an insured depository institution by refusing to consider the application on the ground it contained insufficient information. The FDIC maintained that this failure to provide sufficient information constituted “abandonment” of the application and, as a result, the Change in Bank Control Act’s (“CIBCA”) statutory deadlines for the FDIC to rule on the application never began to run. The Court, however, rejected the FDIC’s argument, holding the statutory deadline is triggered by any notice that provides the basic information about the potential acquirer of the bank and the target bank. The Court held that the FDIC improperly rendered the statutory deadline for acting on a proposed acquisition a dead letter and denied the applicant the right to judicial review. The decision could represent an important precedent regarding the statutory period for regulatory review of applications to acquire banks under the CIBCA, and, although the statutory and regulatory schemes are different, potentially under the Bank Holding Company Act and Bank Merger Act.