Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[obiterdictum]

Yes. The single goal is to vacate the Third Amendment and monetary compensation is not sought beyond the costs associated with bringing the case to court.

Perry Capital is making allegations that the both the US Treasury and FHFA have violated specific statutes of Administrative Procedure Act and HERA 2008 in forming and executing the Third Amendment to the PSPAs and therefore, that amendment should be vacated in its entirety.

The Perry Capital case is not invoking a defense of constitutional law to make its case.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
95. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for an order and judgment:
a. Declaring that the Third Amendment, and its adoption, are not in
accordance with HERA within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(C); and that Treasury
and the FHFA acted arbitrarily and capriciously within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
§ 706(2)(A) by executing the Third Amendment;

b. Vacating and setting aside the Third Amendment, including its provisions
that sweep the full amount of the Companies’ net worth to Treasury, that prevent
redemption of the Government Preferred Stock, and that accelerate the Companies’
dissolution;

c. Enjoining Treasury and its officers, employees, and agents from
implementing, applying, or taking any action whatsoever pursuant to the Third
Amendment;

d. Enjoining the FHFA and its officers, employees, and agents from
implementing, applying, or taking any action whatsoever pursuant to the Third
Amendment;

e. Awarding Perry Capital its reasonable costs, including attorneys’ fees,
incurred in bringing this action; and

f. Granting such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Source: http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2013/07/perryvus-complaint.pdf