Photo of Ethan G. Ostroff

Ethan’s practice focuses on financial services litigation and compliance counseling, as well as digital assets and blockchain technology. With a long track record of successful litigation results across the U.S., both bank and non-bank clients rely on him for comprehensive advice throughout their business cycle.

On January 27, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a significant opinion holding that the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) does not prohibit the enforcement of arbitration agreements in credit card contracts under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).

In a previous post, we discussed the oral arguments held on December 18, 2024, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in the case of Insurance Marketing Coalition Limited (IMC) v. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The case challenged the FCC’s December 2023 order under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), which aimed to reduce unwanted robocalls and texts by closing the “lead generator loophole” and requiring “one-to-one consent” for telemarketing communications. The new rule was set to take effect on January 27, 2025. However, during oral arguments, the Eleventh Circuit judges expressed skepticism about the FCC’s justification for its new rule.

On January 15, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a Compliance Aid to clarify the requirements under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) and Regulation E. Electronic Fund Transfers (EFTs) are defined as “any transfer of funds that is initiated through an electronic terminal, telephone, computer, or magnetic tape for the purpose of ordering, instructing, or authorizing a financial institution to debit or credit a consumer’s account.” The Compliance Aid, presented in a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) format, addresses various aspects of EFTs, including coverage, financial institutions’ obligations, and error resolution processes.

This article was republished on insideARM on January 28, 2025.

In our previous post, we discussed the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection’s (NYC DCWP) decision to delay the enforcement of the amended debt collection rules from December 1, 2024, to April 1, 2025. This postponement was in response to industry concerns and a legal challenge filed by ACA International, Inc. and Independent, Inc. NYC DCWP then announced it would delay the effective date for the amended rules to April 1, 2025, to align with the enforcement date.

In this episode of the Crypto Exchange, Ethan Ostroff is joined by colleagues Pete Jeydel and Matt Orso to discuss a recent landmark decision from the Fifth Circuit regarding Tornado Cash. The court ruled that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) exceeded its authority by sanctioning immutable smart contracts created by Tornado Cash. This decision has significant implications for the regulation of decentralized finance (DeFi) technologies under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

On January 10, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) issued a notice of proposed interpretive rule (Proposed Rule). The deadline for comments is March 31, 2025. The Proposed Rule would apply the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA)—which protects consumers against errors and fraud—to new types of digital payment mechanisms, including stablecoins and other digital currencies.

On January 8, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) officially recognized Financial Data Exchange, Inc. (FDX) as the first standard-setting body under the Personal Financial Data Rights promulgated rule under Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act. This rule, released in October 2024, requires depository and nondepository entities to make available to consumers and authorized third parties certain data relating to consumers’ accounts, establish obligations for third parties accessing a consumer’s data, and provide basic standards for data access.