Legal and Regulatory Proceedings	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2011
Legal and Regulatory Proceedings	18. LEGAL AND REGULATORY PROCEEDINGS During April 2006, the Bancorp was added as a defendant in a consolidated antitrust class action lawsuit originally filed against Visa®, MasterCard® and several other major financial institutions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs, merchants operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade associations, claim that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks are unreasonable and seek injunctive relief and unspecified damages. In addition to being a named defendant, the Bancorp is also subject to a possible indemnification obligation of Visa as discussed in Note 17 and has also entered into with Visa, MasterCard and certain other named defendants judgment and loss sharing agreements that attempt to allocate financial responsibility to the parties thereto in the event certain settlements or judgments occur. Accordingly, prior to the sale of Class B shares during 2009, the Bancorp had recorded a litigation reserve of $243 million to account for its potential exposure in this and related litigation. Additionally, the Bancorp had also recorded its proportional share of $199 million of the Visa escrow account funded with proceeds from the Visa IPO along with several subsequent fundings. Upon the Bancorp's sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares during 2009, and the recognition of the total return swap that transfers conversion risk of the Class B shares back to the Bancorp, the Bancorp reversed the remaining net litigation reserve related to the Bancorp's exposure through Visa. Additionally, the Bancorp has remaining reserves related to this litigation of $49 million and $30 million as of December 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively. Refer to Note 17 for further information regarding the Bancorp's net litigation reserve and ownership interest in Visa. Fact and expert discovery in the litigation has been essentially completed. A motion for class action certification, certain defense motions to dismiss, and cross-motions for summary judgments are pending. A tentative date has been set for the third quarter of 2012. In September 2007, Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. (Katz) filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and its Ohio banking subsidiary. In the suit, Katz alleges that the Bancorp and its Ohio bank are infringing on Katz's patents for interactive call processing technology by offering certain automated telephone banking and other services. This lawsuit is one of many related patent infringement suits brought by Katz in various courts against numerous other defendants. Katz is seeking unspecified monetary damages and penalties as well as injunctive relief in the suit. Management believes there are substantial defenses to these claims and intends to defend them vigorously. The impact of the final disposition of this lawsuit cannot be assessed at this time. For the year ended December 31, 2008, five putative securities class action complaints were filed against the Bancorp and its Chief Executive Officer, among other parties. The five cases have been consolidated under the caption Local 295/Local 851 IBT Employer Group Pension Trust and Welfare Fund v. Fifth Third Bancorp. et al., Case No. 1:08CV00421, and are currently pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The lawsuits allege violations of federal securities laws related to disclosures made by the Bancorp in press releases and filings with the SEC regarding its quality and sufficiency of capital, credit losses and related matters, and seeking unquantified damages on behalf of putative classes of persons who either purchased the Bancorp's securities or trust preferred securities, or acquired the Bancorp's securities pursuant to the acquisition of First Charter Corporation. These cases remain in the discovery stages of litigation. The impact of the final disposition of these lawsuits cannot be assessed at this time. In addition to the foregoing, two cases were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and certain officers alleging violations of ERISA based on allegations similar to those set forth in the securities class action cases filed during the same period of time. The two cases alleging violations of ERISA were dismissed by the trial court, and are being appealed to the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 16, 2010, Edward P. Zemprelli (Zemprelli) filed a lawsuit in the Hamilton County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. The lawsuit was a purported derivative action brought by a shareholder of the Bancorp against certain of the Bancorp's officers and directors, and which named the Bancorp as a nominal defendant. In the lawsuit, Zemprelli brought claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment against the defendant officers and directors. The alleged basis for these claims was that the defendant officers and directors attempted to disguise from the public the truth about the credit quality of the Bancorp's loan portfolio, its capital position, and its need to raise capital. Zemprelli, on behalf of the Bancorp, brought unspecified money damages allegedly sustained by the Bancorp as a result of the defendants' conduct, as well as injunctive relief. On August 15, 2011, the Court granted defendants' motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment. Zemprelli has filed a notice of appeal but later dismissed the appeal, as a result the trial court dismissal is final. In September 2011, DataTreasury Corporation filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary. In the suit, DataTreasury alleges that the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary are infringing on DataTreasury's patents for imaged-based check processing. This lawsuit is one of many related patent infringement suits brought by DataTreasury against numerous other defendants. DataTreasury is seeking unspecified monetary damages and penalties. Due to the recent filing of the lawsuit, management is in the process of reviewing the claims against the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary. The Bancorp and its subsidiaries are not parties to any other material litigation. However, there are other litigation matters that arise in the normal course of business. While it is impossible to ascertain the ultimate resolution or range of financial liability with respect to these contingent matters, management believes any resulting liability from these other actions would not have a material effect upon the Bancorp's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Bancorp and/or its affiliates are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by government and self-regulatory agencies, including the SEC, regarding their respective businesses. Such matters may result in material adverse consequences, including without limitation, adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, orders, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of the Bancorp's SEC filings and/or financial statements, as applicable, and/or determinations of material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures. The SEC is investigating and has made several requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning issues which the Bancorp understands relate to accounting and reporting matters involving certain of its commercial loans. This could lead to an enforcement proceeding by the SEC which, in turn, may result in one or more such material adverse consequences. On May 16, 2011, the Bancorp caused a notice to be delivered to the trustee of Fifth Third Capital Trust VII (the “Trust”) to mandatorily redeem the 8.875% trust preferred securities of the Trust (the “Trust Preferred Securities”) at an aggregate cash redemption price of $25.18 per Trust Preferred Security. The Trust Preferred Securities were listed on the NYSE. The NYSE was notified of the redemption on May 17, 2011 and a Current Report on Form 8-K describing the redemption notice was filed by the Company with the SEC on May 18, 2011. Trading in this security was halted by the NYSE shortly after this Form 8-K was filed and did not resume until May 19, 2011. The Trust Preferred Securities traded at prices above the redemption amount during the period between the time the trustee was notified and before the Form 8-K describing the redemption was filed. The Bancorp was neither a party to nor a participant in any trading of the Trust Preferred Securities during such period or thereafter. On May 25, 2011, the Bancorp announced it would voluntarily compensate persons who purchased these Trust Preferred Securities after the redemption notice was delivered on May 16, 2011 and before trading was halted in the security on May 18, 2011. The compensation process was substantially completed by December 31, 2011 and Fifth Third paid out less than $1 million to affected security holders who submitted claims. The SEC investigated and made requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning the circumstances and related issues surrounding the notification and disclosure process and timing thereof in connection with such redemption of the Trust Preferred Securities. The Bancorp cooperated with those requests. On August 1, 2011, the Bancorp received a “Wells notice” from the staff of the SEC advising the Bancorp that the staff has reached a preliminary conclusion to recommend that the Commission authorize the staff to file an enforcement action against the Bancorp relating to such matter for violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD. On November 22, 2011 the Bancorp entered into a settlement with the SEC in connection with the alleged violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD. Under the terms of the settlement, Fifth Third neither admitted nor denied such allegations and agreed to cease and desist from committing any violations and any future violations of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Regulation FD. As noted in the order instituting the proceeding, in agreeing to this settlement, the SEC considered the remedial acts promptly and voluntarily undertaken by Fifth Third—including its compensation of investors harmed by the timing of its disclosure and its adoption and implementation of additional policies and procedures relating to the redemption of securities—and the cooperation it afforded the SEC staff. The Bancorp is party to numerous claims and lawsuits concerning matters arising from the conduct of its business activities. The outcome of litigation and the timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict. The following factors, among others, contribute to this lack of predictability: plaintiff claims often include significant legal uncertainties, damages alleged by plaintiffs are often unspecified or overstated, discovery may not have started or may not be complete and material facts may be disputed or unsubstantiated. As a result of these factors, the Bancorp is not always able to provide an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes for each claim. A reserve for a potential litigation loss is established when information related to the loss contingency indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such reserve is adjusted from time to time thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Bancorp also determines, when possible (due to the uncertainties described above), estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses, in excess of amounts reserved. Under U.S. GAAP, an event is “reasonably possible” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely” and an event is “remote” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight.” Thus, references to the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss for cases in which the Bancorp is able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss mean the upper end of the range of loss for cases for which the Bancorp believes the risk of loss is more than slight. For matters where the Bancorp is able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, the Bancorp currently estimates that it is reasonably possible that it could incur losses related to legal proceedings including the matters discussed above in an aggregate amount up to approximately $68 million in excess of amounts reserved, with it also being reasonably possible that no losses will be incurred in these matters. The estimates included in this amount are based on the Bancorp's analysis of currently available information, and as new information is obtained the Bancorp may change its estimates. For these matters and others where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, there may be a range of possible losses in excess of the established reserve that cannot be estimated. Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Bancorp believes that the eventual outcome of the actions against the Bancorp and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Bancorp's consolidated financial position. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of those matters, if unfavorable, may be material to Bancorp's results of operations for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the size of the loss or liability imposed and the operating results for the applicable period.

Legal and Regulatory Proceedings

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

18. LEGAL AND REGULATORY PROCEEDINGS

During April 2006, the Bancorp was added as a defendant in a consolidated antitrust class action lawsuit originally filed against Visa®, MasterCard® and several other major financial institutions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs, merchants operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade associations, claim that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks are unreasonable and seek injunctive relief and unspecified damages. In addition to being a named defendant, the Bancorp is also subject to a possible indemnification obligation of Visa as discussed in Note 17 and has also entered into with Visa, MasterCard and certain other named defendants judgment and loss sharing agreements that attempt to allocate financial responsibility to the parties thereto in the event certain settlements or judgments occur. Accordingly, prior to the sale of Class B shares during 2009, the Bancorp had recorded a litigation reserve of $243 million to account for its potential exposure in this and related litigation. Additionally, the Bancorp had also recorded its proportional share of $199 million of the Visa escrow account funded with proceeds from the Visa IPO along with several subsequent fundings. Upon the Bancorp's sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares during 2009, and the recognition of the total return swap that transfers conversion risk of the Class B shares back to the Bancorp, the Bancorp reversed the remaining net litigation reserve related to the Bancorp's exposure through Visa. Additionally, the Bancorp has remaining reserves related to this litigation of $49 million and $30 million as of December 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively. Refer to Note 17 for further information regarding the Bancorp's net litigation reserve and ownership interest in Visa. Fact and expert discovery in the litigation has been essentially completed. A motion for class action certification, certain defense motions to dismiss, and cross-motions for summary judgments are pending. A tentative date has been set for the third quarter of 2012.

In September 2007, Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. (Katz) filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and its Ohio banking subsidiary. In the suit, Katz alleges that the Bancorp and its Ohio bank are infringing on Katz's patents for interactive call processing technology by offering certain automated telephone banking and other services. This lawsuit is one of many related patent infringement suits brought by Katz in various courts against numerous other defendants. Katz is seeking unspecified monetary damages and penalties as well as injunctive relief in the suit. Management believes there are substantial defenses to these claims and intends to defend them vigorously. The impact of the final disposition of this lawsuit cannot be assessed at this time.

For the year ended December 31, 2008, five putative securities class action complaints were filed against the Bancorp and its Chief Executive Officer, among other parties. The five cases have been consolidated under the caption Local 295/Local 851 IBT Employer Group Pension Trust and Welfare Fund v. Fifth Third Bancorp. et al., Case No. 1:08CV00421, and are currently pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The lawsuits allege violations of federal securities laws related to disclosures made by the Bancorp in press releases and filings with the SEC regarding its quality and sufficiency of capital, credit losses and related matters, and seeking unquantified damages on behalf of putative classes of persons who either purchased the Bancorp's securities or trust preferred securities, or acquired the Bancorp's securities pursuant to the acquisition of First Charter Corporation. These cases remain in the discovery stages of litigation. The impact of the final disposition of these lawsuits cannot be assessed at this time. In addition to the foregoing, two cases were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and certain officers alleging violations of ERISA based on allegations similar to those set forth in the securities class action cases filed during the same period of time. The two cases alleging violations of ERISA were dismissed by the trial court, and are being appealed to the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On September 16, 2010, Edward P. Zemprelli (Zemprelli) filed a lawsuit in the Hamilton County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. The lawsuit was a purported derivative action brought by a shareholder of the Bancorp against certain of the Bancorp's officers and directors, and which named the Bancorp as a nominal defendant. In the lawsuit, Zemprelli brought claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment against the defendant officers and directors. The alleged basis for these claims was that the defendant officers and directors attempted to disguise from the public the truth about the credit quality of the Bancorp's loan portfolio, its capital position, and its need to raise capital. Zemprelli, on behalf of the Bancorp, brought unspecified money damages allegedly sustained by the Bancorp as a result of the defendants' conduct, as well as injunctive relief. On August 15, 2011, the Court granted defendants' motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment. Zemprelli has filed a notice of appeal but later dismissed the appeal, as a result the trial court dismissal is final.

In September 2011, DataTreasury Corporation filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary. In the suit, DataTreasury alleges that the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary are infringing on DataTreasury's patents for imaged-based check processing. This lawsuit is one of many related patent infringement suits brought by DataTreasury against numerous other defendants. DataTreasury is seeking unspecified monetary damages and penalties. Due to the recent filing of the lawsuit, management is in the process of reviewing the claims against the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary.

The Bancorp and its subsidiaries are not parties to any other material litigation. However, there are other litigation matters that arise in the normal course of business. While it is impossible to ascertain the ultimate resolution or range of financial liability with respect to these contingent matters, management believes any resulting liability from these other actions would not have a material effect upon the Bancorp's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The Bancorp and/or its affiliates are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by government and self-regulatory agencies, including the SEC, regarding their respective businesses. Such matters may result in material adverse consequences, including without limitation, adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, orders, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of the Bancorp's SEC filings and/or financial statements, as applicable, and/or determinations of material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures. The SEC is investigating and has made several requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning issues which the Bancorp understands relate to accounting and reporting matters involving certain of its commercial loans. This could lead to an enforcement proceeding by the SEC which, in turn, may result in one or more such material adverse consequences.

On May 16, 2011, the Bancorp caused a notice to be delivered to the trustee of Fifth Third Capital Trust VII (the “Trust”) to mandatorily redeem the 8.875% trust preferred securities of the Trust (the “Trust Preferred Securities”) at an aggregate cash redemption price of $25.18 per Trust Preferred Security. The Trust Preferred Securities were listed on the NYSE. The NYSE was notified of the redemption on May 17, 2011 and a Current Report on Form 8-K describing the redemption notice was filed by the Company with the SEC on May 18, 2011. Trading in this security was halted by the NYSE shortly after this Form 8-K was filed and did not resume until May 19, 2011. The Trust Preferred Securities traded at prices above the redemption amount during the period between the time the trustee was notified and before the Form 8-K describing the redemption was filed. The Bancorp was neither a party to nor a participant in any trading of the Trust Preferred Securities during such period or thereafter. On May 25, 2011, the Bancorp announced it would voluntarily compensate persons who purchased these Trust Preferred Securities after the redemption notice was delivered on May 16, 2011 and before trading was halted in the security on May 18, 2011. The compensation process was substantially completed by December 31, 2011 and Fifth Third paid out less than $1 million to affected security holders who submitted claims. The SEC investigated and made requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning the circumstances and related issues surrounding the notification and disclosure process and timing thereof in connection with such redemption of the Trust Preferred Securities. The Bancorp cooperated with those requests. On August 1, 2011, the Bancorp received a “Wells notice” from the staff of the SEC advising the Bancorp that the staff has reached a preliminary conclusion to recommend that the Commission authorize the staff to file an enforcement action against the Bancorp relating to such matter for violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD. On November 22, 2011 the Bancorp entered into a settlement with the SEC in connection with the alleged violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD. Under the terms of the settlement, Fifth Third neither admitted nor denied such allegations and agreed to cease and desist from committing any violations and any future violations of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Regulation FD. As noted in the order instituting the proceeding, in agreeing to this settlement, the SEC considered the remedial acts promptly and voluntarily undertaken by Fifth Third—including its compensation of investors harmed by the timing of its disclosure and its adoption and implementation of additional policies and procedures relating to the redemption of securities—and the cooperation it afforded the SEC staff.

The Bancorp is party to numerous claims and lawsuits concerning matters arising from the conduct of its business activities. The outcome of litigation and the timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict. The following factors, among others, contribute to this lack of predictability: plaintiff claims often include significant legal uncertainties, damages alleged by plaintiffs are often unspecified or overstated, discovery may not have started or may not be complete and material facts may be disputed or unsubstantiated. As a result of these factors, the Bancorp is not always able to provide an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes for each claim. A reserve for a potential litigation loss is established when information related to the loss contingency indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such reserve is adjusted from time to time thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Bancorp also determines, when possible (due to the uncertainties described above), estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses, in excess of amounts reserved. Under U.S. GAAP, an event is “reasonably possible” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely” and an event is “remote” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight.” Thus, references to the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss for cases in which the Bancorp is able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss mean the upper end of the range of loss for cases for which the Bancorp believes the risk of loss is more than slight. For matters where the Bancorp is able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, the Bancorp currently estimates that it is reasonably possible that it could incur losses related to legal proceedings including the matters discussed above in an aggregate amount up to approximately $68 million in excess of amounts reserved, with it also being reasonably possible that no losses will be incurred in these matters. The estimates included in this amount are based on the Bancorp's analysis of currently available information, and as new information is obtained the Bancorp may change its estimates.

For these matters and others where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, there may be a range of possible losses in excess of the established reserve that cannot be estimated. Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Bancorp believes that the eventual outcome of the actions against the Bancorp and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Bancorp's consolidated financial position. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of those matters, if unfavorable, may be material to Bancorp's results of operations for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the size of the loss or liability imposed and the operating results for the applicable period.