She may be pointing to this blurb in the story.If you 'READ' into it assets list for 'what was bought' then the 3.1 might apply if you really like to stretch.
The lawsuit is part of a broader battle over what exactly J.P. Morgan bought when it picked up WaMu for $1.8 billion as markets seized up and the worldwide financial system teetered on the brink in the fall of 2008.
Fish, I understand that Viva gets a little too excited with his posts.
Viva might be right about the FDIC needing to show the 3.1A because JPM is claiming they bought assets and not liabilities and FDIC is claiming that assets and liabilities were sold.
So the question lies at what was seized and what was sold? Thereby requiring the proper accounting of assets.
This is a case of FDIC and JPM put themselves in very dangerous positions.
If the Judge request the FDIC to provide the court with a list of assets and liabilities seized and sold then watch how the FDIC would either throw JPM under the bus or claim that the sale was never completed and JPM should return assets.