2025-11-12T14:56:00-06:00 2024-12-31 621046406 JOHNSON HICKEY & MURCHISON PC 2215 OLAN MILLS DRIVE CHATTANOOGA TN 37421 990 2024-01-01 823474942 NATIONAL STUDENT LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK NATI 2027347495 1701 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE NW WASHINGTON DC 20036 AARON AMENT PRESIDENT 2027347495 2025-11-12 1 1 LINDA G ENGLAND P00707864 4237560052 2025-11-12 2024 2025-03-06 01:10:19Z STUDENT DEFENSE AARON AMENT 1701 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE NW WASHINGTON DC 20036 4677958 0 X WWW.DEFENDSTUDENTS.ORG X 2017 DC WORKING TO ADVANCE STUDENTS RIGHTS TO EDUCATION. 5 5 11 0 0 0 2998675 1835636 49334 2749729 43773 92593 17802 0 3109584 4677958 0 0 0 0 1367761 1595310 0 0 31728 515647 595529 1883408 2190839 1226176 2487119 2205762 4629178 127357 62228 2078405 4566950 X THE NATIONAL STUDENT LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZED TO ADVANCE STUDENTS' RIGHTS TO EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY AND SUPPORTING STUDENT' ECONOMIC MOBILITY BY USING IMPACT LITIGATION AND ADVOCACY TO PROTECT STUDENTS FROM PREDATORY LENDING AND ABUSIVE PRACTICES. OUR FOCUS SPANS THE ENTIRE STUDENT LIFECYCLE,FROM RECRUITMENT AND SUPPORTING STUDENTS' BASIC NEEDS TO EDUCATIONAL QUALITY TO COMPLETE STUDENT LOAN PAYMENT. 0 0 1925897 2749729 PURSUANT TO REV PROC. 92-59, 1992-C C.B.411, THE ORGANIZATION IS PROVIDING A LIST OF CASES LITIGATED DURING 2024.DURING 2024, THE ORGANIZATION LITIGATED SIX LAWSUITS AGAINST THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PURSAUNT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. 552, ET SEQ., COVERING THIRTY-ONE REQUESTS SUBMITTED UNDER FOIA. AS A MATTER OF PRACTICE, THE ORGANIZATION SEEKS A "FEE WAIVER" FROM THE GOVERNMENT IN CONNECTION WITH EACH REQUEST, ESTABLISHING THAT THE REQUESTED DISCLOSURE UNDER FOIA IS "IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST." SEE 5 U.S.C. 552(A)(4)(A)(III). THE ORGANIZATION HAS NEVER BEEN REQUIRED TO PAY FEES IN CONNECTION WITH ANY REQUEST. DURING 2024, THE ORGANIZATION LITIGATED THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL MATTERS, THE SELECTION OF WHICH WAS NOT MADE WITH A CONSIDERATION OF THE EXPECTATION OR POSSIBILITY OF A FEE AWARD. (1) BALTEZAR V. CARDONA & U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, N.D. CAL.). THIS IS A CHALLENGE UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S 2019 REPEAL OF THE GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT RULE, WHICH WAS DESIGNED TO PROTECT STUDENTS FROM CAREER-ORIENTED HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDED LIMITED VALUE COMENSURATE TO STUDENT DEBT BURDENS INCURRED. (2) DUNAGAN V. ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF ART (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, N.D. ILL.). THIS IS A PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION AGAINST AN INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT MISLED STUDENTS ABOUT ITS STATUS AS AN ACCREDITED INSTITUTION. THE SUIT SEEKS TO HOLD RESPONSIBLE BOTH THE INSTITUTION AND THE OWNERS AND EXECUTIVES WHO PLAYED AN INSTRUMENTAL ROLE IN THE DECEPTION. THIS IS PART OF THE ORGANIZATION'S EFFORTS TO ENSURE THAT INDIVIDUAL WRONGDOERS ARE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR PREDATORY CONDUCT BY INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.(3) DIGITAL MEDIA SOLUTIONS LLC V. SOUTH UNIVERSITY OF OHIO ET AL. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, N.D. OHIO). THIS IS A FEDERAL COURT RECEIVERSHIP PROCEEDING INVOLVING CERTAIN OF THE DEFENDANTS IN THE DUNAGAN MATTER DESCRIBED ABOVE. IN 2022, STUDENT DEFENSE REPRESENTED STUDENTS TO PRESERVE THEIR RIGHTS, AND THE RIGHTS OF OTHER STUDENTS, AGAINST RECEIVERSHIP ENTITIES. (4) DETMER ET AL. V. LA'JAMES COLLEGE OF HAIRSTYLING, INC. ET AL (IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY). THIS IS A CERTIFIED CLASS ACTION AGAINST AN INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT DELAYED DISBURSEMENT OF STUDENT CREDIT BALANCES, IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL REGULATION AND STATE LAW. (5) CARROLL ET AL. V. WALDEN UNIVERSITY ET AL (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, D. MARYLAND). THIS IS A PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, THE EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT, AND STATE CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS. IN ADDITION TO REDRESSING WRONGDOING, THE CASE SEEKS TO AFFIRM THE USE OF CORE CIVIL RIGHTS STATUTES IN THE CONTEXT OF FEDERAL STUDENT LENDING.(6) ARBITRATIONS AGAINST LAMBDA, INC. D/B/A/ LAMBDA SCHOOL OR BLOOM INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. IN 2024, THE ORGANIZATION REPRESENTED EIGHT INDIVIDUALS SEPARATELY PURSUING ARBITRATIONS AGAINST THE LAMBDA SCHOOL FOR MISREPRESENTATIONS REGARDING STUDENT OUTCOMES. THE CASES NOT ONLY SOUGHT REDRESS FOR THE CLIENT, BUT ALSO SOUGHT TO HIGHLIGHT PROBLEMS WITH REGULATIONS REGARDING UNACCREDITED "BOOT CAMPS AND THE USE OF "INCOME SHARE AGREEMENTS" TO FINANCE HIGHER EDUCATION. SEPARATELY, IN FULLER ET AL. V. BLOOM INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (FORMERLY D/B/A LAMBDA SCHOOL) AND AUSTEN ALLRED, ET AL. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, N.D. CAL), THE ORGANIZATION LITIGATED A SIMILAR CLAIM AS A PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION AND TESTED THE EXTENT OF THE MANDATORY ARBITRATION CLAUSE THAT APPEARED IN THE "INCOME SHARE AGREEMENT." (7) DUNN ET AL. V. CARDONA & U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, D. MASS). THIS LAWSUIT WAS FILED IN APRIL 2022 TO CHALLENGE, UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S UNREASONABLE DELAY IN FAILING TO ADJUDICATE A 2016 GROUP APPLICATION FOR STUDENT LOAN DISCHARGES SUBMITTED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MASSACHUSETTS ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF FORMER STUDENTS AT KAPLAN CAREER INSTITUTE IN MASSACHUSETTS. IN AUGUST 2022, THE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCED THAT IT HAD GRANTED THE APPLICATION. (8) HEMPHILL ET AL. V. CARDONA & U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, D.D.C.) THIS LAWSUIT WAS FILED IN MAY 2022 TO CHALLENGE, UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S UNREASONABLE DELAY IN FAILING TO ADJUDICATE A 2016 GROUP APPLICATION FOR STUDENT LOAN DISCHARGES SUBMITTED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ILLINOIS ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF FORMER STUDENTS AT WESTWOOD COLLEGE IN ILLINOIS. IN AUGUST 2022, THE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCED THAT IT WOULD BE PROVIDING $1.5 BILLION IN STUDENT LOAN DISCHARGES TO 79,000 BORROWERS WHO ATTENDED WESTWOOD COLLEGE BETWEEN JANUARY 2002 AND ITS CLOSURE IN 2016. (9) FAVELL ET AL. V. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, C.D. CAL). THIS IS A PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION FOR DEFRAUDING STUDENTS BY USING MISLEADING COLLEGE RANKINGS REGARDING THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION. IN ADDITION TO REDRESSING WRONGDOING, THE CASE SEEKS TO HIGHLIGHT THE PERNICIOUS EFFECTS AND ILLEGALITY OF "REVENUE SHARE" AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLEGES AND THIRD-PARTY ENTITIES THAT PROVIDE BOTH RECRUITING AND ONLINE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SERVICES. (10) NATALIA ORTIZ V. SABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE & R3 EDUCATION, INC. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, D. MASS). THIS WAS FILED AS A PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF MASSACHUSETTS LAW WITH RESPECT TO MARKETING AND ADVERTISING BY SABA UNIVERSITY. IN ADDITION TO REDRESSING WRONGDOING, THE CASE SEEKS TO HIGHLIGHT HOW INSTITUTIONS CAN MANIPULATE ADVERTISEMENTS OF STUDENT OUTCOMES THROUGH DECEPTIVE USE OF STATISTICAL REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING SUCCESS ON LICENSURE EXAMINATIONS.(11) ELVA LOPEZ V. CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SIMPLILEARN AMERICAS, INC (SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO). THIS WAS FILED AS A PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA LAW WITH RESPECT TO THE MARKETING AND ADVERTISING OF A SHORT-TERM BOOTCAMP BY THE DEFENDANTS. IN ADDITION TO REDRESSING WRONGDOING, THE CASE SEEKS TO HIGHLIGHT HOW CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS CONTRACT WITH THIRD-PARTIES TO DESIGN AND PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS, WITHOUT ADEQUATELY DISCLOSING TO STUDENTS THE FACTS SURROUNDING THE PROGRAMS.(12) TANNER SMITH ET AL. V. GRAND CANYON EDUCATION INC. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, D. AZ). THIS CASE WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF A PUTATIVE CLASS OF FORMER DOCTROAL STUDENTS ALLEGING THAT DEFENDANT ORCHESTRATED A DECEITFUL RACKETEERING SCHEME BY MISLEADING PROSPECTIVE STUDENTS ABOUT THE TRUE COST OF DOCTORAL DEGREES. PLAINTIFFS ALLEGE THAT DEFENDANT DEFRAUDED STUDENTS OUT OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUALLY IN VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL RICO STATUTE AS WELL AS STATE CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS. IN ADDITION TO REDRESSING WRONGDOING, THIS CASE SEEKS TO ALTER HOW OPERATORS OF LARGE FOR-PROFIT GRADUATE PROGRAMS RECRUIT AND ENROLL STUDENTS, WHILE ALSO HIGHLIGHTING THE ROLE OF NON-PROFIT CONVERSIONS AND SALES TO NON-PROFIT AND PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES. (13) HAYLEY CLEMENTS V. XAVIER BECERRA, ET AL. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT, M.D. AL). THIS CASE WAS FILED AGAINST THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ON BEHALF OF A NURSE PRACTIONER WHO JOINED THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE CORPS (NHSC) IN 2020. AFTER RECEIVING $25,000 IN STUDENT LOAN RELIEF UNDER THE NHSC PROGRAM, PLAINTIFF WAS FINED OVER $217,000 BECAUSE SHE WAS UNABLE TO FIND A JOB THAT MET PROGRAM CRITERIA WITHIN COMMUTING DISTANCE OF HER HOME. PLAINTIFF BROUGHT SUIT UNDER THE EXCESSIVE FINES CLAUSE OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT, THE SEVENTH AMENDMENT, AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT. IN ADDITION TO REDRESSING WRONGDOING, THIS CASE SOUGHT TO REFORM THE MANNER IN WHICH HHS LEVIES FINES IN ORDER TO BRING THE PROGRAM IN LINE WITH CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND CONGRESSIONAL INTENT. (14) NATIONAL STUDENT LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK V. UNIV. OF MARYLAND GLOBAL CAMPUS (SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA). THIS CASE WAS FILED IN STATE COURT UNDER THE DC CONSUMER PROTECTION PROCEDURES ACT FOR VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL INCENTIVE COMPENSATION BAN ARISING FROM DEFENDANT'S PAYMENTS TO THE ONLINE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PROVIDER COURSEA, INC. PLAINTIFF SOUGHT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND NO MONETARY DAMAGES AND TO HIGHLIGHT THE PERNICIOUS EFFECTS OF THE "BUNDLED SERVICING" LOOPHOLE TO THE FEDERAL INCENTIVE COMPENSATION BAN. SHOULD THE ORGANIZATION RECOVER ATTORNEY'S FEES, SUCH FEES WILL BE PAID TO THE ORGANIZATION AND NOT TO INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEYS WHOSE COMPENSATION IS DETERMINED WITHOUT REFERENCE TO FEES RECEIVED IN CONNECTION WITH CASES HANDLED. 1925897 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 23 0 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 AL AK CA FL GA HI IL KS KY MD MA MI MN MS NH NJ NM NY OR PA RI SC TN UT VA WV WI X THE ORGANIZATION 2027347495 1701 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE NW WASHINGTON DC 20036 JACEK PRUSKI CHAIRMAN 0.90 X X 0 0 0 SABA BIREDA SECRETARY 0.90 X X 0 0 0 JOHN ROBINSON TREASURER 0.90 X X 0 0 0 MOHAMED ABDEL KADER DIRECTOR 0.90 X 0 0 0 JOY SILVERN DIRECTOR 0.90 X 0 0 0 AARON AMENT PRESIDENT 45.00 X 228072 0 42809 DANIEL ZIBEL CHIEF COUNSEL 45.00 X 228072 0 38101 ALEX ELSON SENIOR COUNSEL 45.00 X 187143 0 39399 ERIC ROTHSCHILD LITIGATION DIRECTOR 45.00 X 192814 0 18541 836101 0 138850 4 0 1 0 BE CLEAR 2255 SHERIDAN BOULEVARD UNIT C 106 EDGEWATER CO 80214 CONSULTING 164171 1 1835636 1835636 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SER 541100 2749729 2749729 2749729 92593 92593 4677958 2749729 0 92593 X 537054 490076 37302 9676 809700 738871 56240 14589 15509 13472 1600 437 140758 129744 8625 2389 92289 85060 5763 1466 42278 42278 29060 29060 230493 145421 85072 1594 1456 109 29 1483 1354 102 27 14029 12815 963 251 32115 29335 2205 575 54264 49567 3726 971 17045 15570 1170 305 LITIGATION PREPARATION 68883 68883 DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS 35519 35519 LEGAL RESEARCH 30928 30928 IT CYBER SECURITY 13416 12255 921 240 24422 23293 356 773 2190839 1925897 233214 31728 530515 2983699 720730 150000 20463 30980 16245 18409 917809 1446090 2205762 4629178 127357 62228 127357 62228 X 1278121 4298962 800284 267988 2078405 4566950 2205762 4629178 X 2487119 1427 -1 X 0 1 X 1 0 X 1130115 1916460 1292503 2827675 1835636 9002389 1130115 1916460 1292503 2827675 1835636 9002389 7022583 1979806 4190 43773 92593 140556 9142945 3202907 0.21650 0.38630 X RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED 0 MERRILL LYNCH MONEY MARKET 1446090 F 1446090 X 4679385 1427 1427 4677958 0 4677958 2190839 0 2190839 0 2190839 PART X, LINE 2: THE ORGANIZATION FOLLOWS THE REQUIREMENTS OF PROFESSIONAL LITERATURE IN ACCOUNTING FOR UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS. UNDER THIS GUIDANCE, AN ORGANIZATION MUST RECOGNIZE THE TAX BENEFIT FROM AN UNCERTAIN TAX POSITION ONLY IF IT IS MORE LIKELY THAN NOT THAT THE TAX POSITION WILL BE SUSTAINED ON EXAMINATION WITH TAXING AUTHORITIES. THE ORGANIZATION DOES NOT BELIEVE THERE ARE ANY MATERIAL UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS AND, ACCORDINGLY, IT WILL NOT RECOGNIZE ANY LIABILITY FOR UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS. FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024, THERE WERE NO INTEREST OR PENALTIES RECORDED. THE ORGANIZATION'S FORM 990, RETURN OF ORGANIZATION EXEMPT FROM INCOME TAX, IS SUBJECT TO EXAMINATION BY THE IRS, GENERALLY FOR THREE YEARS AFTER IT IS FILED. X X X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARON AMENT PRESIDENT 228072 0 0 0 0 0 6842 0 35967 0 270881 0 0 0 DANIEL ZIBEL CHIEF COUNSEL 228072 0 0 0 0 0 6842 0 31259 0 266173 0 0 0 ALEX ELSON SENIOR COUNSEL 187143 0 0 0 0 0 5614 0 33785 0 226542 0 0 0 ERIC ROTHSCHILD LITIGATION DIRECTOR 192814 0 0 0 0 0 5784 0 12757 0 211355 0 0 0 FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11B THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REVIEWS THE TAX RETURN BEFORE IT IS FILED. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12C ALL OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND KEY EMPLOYEES HAVE THE DUTY TO DISCLOSE AN ACTUAL OR POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THIS IS PRESENTED TO THE DIRECTORS AMD MEMBERS OF COMMITTEES CONSIDERING THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT. AFTER DISCLOSURE OF THE FINANCIAL INTEREST AND ALL MATERIAL FACTS HAVE BEEN PRESENTED AND AFTER ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE INTERESTED PERSON, HE OR SHE MUST LEAVE THE BOARD MEETING OR COMMITTEE MEETING WHILE THE DETERMINATION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS DISCUSSED AND VOTED UPON. THE REMAINING BOARD OR COMMITTEE MEMBERS MUST DECIDE IF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS. IF THE BOARD BELIEVES A DIRECTOR OR OFFICER FAILED TO DISCLOSE ACTUAL OR POSSIBLE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, THEY WILL INFORM THE PERSON AND AFFORD THE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO DISCLOSE. THE BOARD MAY TAKE APPROPRIATE DISCIPLINARY AND CORRECTIVE ACTION. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 15 ALL OFFICER SALARIES ARE APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE BOARD (OR AUTHORIZED BOARD COMMITTEE)WHICH REVIEW AND APPROVE THE COMPENSATION, INCLUDING BENEFITS, OF THE PRESIDENT UPON THE HIRING OF THE OFFICER,WHENEVER THE OFFICER'S TERM OF EMPLOYMENT IS RENEWED OR EXTENDED AND WHENEVER THE OFFICER'S COMPENSATION IS MODIFIED (UNLESS THE MODIFICATION EXTENDS TO SUBSTANTIALLY ALL EMPLOYEES). FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19 AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST FORM 990, PART IX, LINE 11G COMMUNICATIONS AND CONSULTANTS: PROGRAM SERVICE EXPENSES 145,421. MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL EXPENSES 73,338. FUNDRAISING EXPENSES 0. TOTAL EXPENSES 218,759. BENEFITS MANAGEMENT: PROGRAM SERVICE EXPENSES 0. MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL EXPENSES 11,734. FUNDRAISING EXPENSES 0. TOTAL EXPENSES 11,734. FORM 990, PART XI, LINE 9: ROUNDING -1.