On December 10, 1986, a federal grand jury indicted James Mallen for allegedly making false statements to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and for allegedly making false statements to a bank for the purposes of influencing the actions of the FDIC. Mallen was the president and a director of a federally insured bank at the time he was indicted. On January 20, 1987, the FDIC issued an ex parte order stating that Mallen's continued service could "pose a threat to the interests of the bank's depositors or threaten to impair public confidence in the bank." The order suspended Mallen as president and as a director of the bank and prohibited him "from further participation in any manner in the conduct of the affairs of the bank, or any other bank insured by the FDIC." In issuing the suspension order without first holding a hearing on the matter, the FDIC acted pursuant to a section of the Financial Institutions Supervisory Act. A copy of the FDIC's order was served on Mallen on January 26, 1987. Four days later, his attorney filed a written request for an "immediate administrative hearing" to commence no later than February 9. The FDIC scheduled a hearing for February 18, but on February 6, Mallen filed suit against the FDIC. Arguing that the FDIC's action denied him due process, Mallen sought a preliminary injunction against the suspension order. Was Mallen denied due process?