Skidmore

ORDER

Plaintiff IntervesL-Mortgage Investment Co. (“Intervest”) moves for summary judgment on defendant Skidmore’s sole remaining counterclaim. This counterclaim is brought under California’s Unfair Competition Law, and alleges that Intervest acted unlawfully by violating a “safety and soundness” regulation promulgated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and codified at 12 C.F.R. § 365.2 . Specifically, Skidmores contend that Intervest failed to adopt “appropriate” lending policies, and alternatively, that Intervest violated such policies.

Intervest previously moved to dismiss this counterclaim, on the ground that Skid-mores lacked standing to bring this claim. This court denied Intervest’s motion in this regard, concluding that Skidmores had standing. Neither party has asked the court to reconsider that judgment. However, having further examined this claim, and mindful of the court’s own continuing obligation to ensure that subject matter jurisdiction is proper, the court reverses this earlier decision.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Regulatory Background

Congress created the FDIC “to promote the soundness of banking.” Weir v. United States, 92 F.2d 634, 636 (7th…