UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-D

ASSET-BACKED ISSUER

DISTRIBUTION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the distribution period from

December 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024

Commission File Number of issuing entity: 333-141930-17

Central Index Key of issuing entity: 1482913

SLM STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2010-2

(Exact name of issuing entity as specified in its charter)

Commission File Number of depositor: 333-141930

Central Index Key of depositor: 0000949114

NAVIENT FUNDING, LLC

(Exact name of depositor as specified in its charter)

Central Index Key of sponsor: 0001601725

NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC

(Exact name of sponsor as specified in its charter)

Scott Booher (703) 984-6890

(Name and telephone number, including area code, of the person to contact in connection with this filing)

Delaware

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization of the

issuing entity)

04-3480392

54-1843973

(I.R.S. Employer Identification Nos.)

c/o BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware

Corporate Trust Administration

103 Bellevue Parkway AIM #19W-0103

Wilmingon, Delaware

19809

(Zip Code)

(Address of principal executive offices

of issuing entity)

(703) 984-6890

(Telephone number including area code)

Not Applicable

(Former name, former address, if changed since last report)

Registered/reporting pursuant to (check one)

				Name of exchange
Title of class	Section 12(b)	Section 12(g)	Section 15(d)	(If Section 12(b))

Class A Student Loan Backed Notes	☐	☐	☑
Class B Student Loan Backed Notes	☐	☐	☑

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes ☑ No ☐

PART I — DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION

Item 1.

Distribution and Pool Performance Information.

On January 27, 2025, SLM Student Loan Trust 2010-2 (the “Trust”) made its regular monthly distribution of funds to holders of its Student Loan-Backed Notes. Navient Solutions, LLC (formerly, Navient Solutions, Inc.), as the administrator, distributed the Monthly Distribution Report for the Trust for the period identified on the cover of this Form 10-D to the Indenture Trustee, on behalf of the Trust’s noteholders of record. This Monthly Distribution Report is attached to this Report as Exhibit 99.1. This report as well as other information about the Trust is also available on the Administrator’s website at http://www.navient.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmsltrusts/. There is no activity to report under Rule 15Ga-1(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with respect to the Trust for the distribution period referred to in the second sentence of this paragraph. The depositor of the Trust filed its most recent report on Form ABS-15G on February 8, 2024 (such report is available at www.sec.gov under the depositor’s CIK No. 0000949114).

PART II — OTHER INFORMATION

Item 2.

Legal Proceedings.

The following three paragraphs are disclosure received from Navient Solutions, LLC (formerly, Navient Solutions, Inc.) (“Navient Solutions”), the servicer for this transaction.

Navient Corporation (“Navient”) has been named as defendant in a number of putative class action and other cases alleging violations of various state and federal consumer protection laws including the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (CFPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), in adversarial proceedings under the United States Bankruptcy Code, and various state consumer protection laws. At this point in time, Navient is unable to anticipate the timing of a resolution or the impact that these legal proceedings may have on its consolidated financial position, liquidity, results of operation or cash flows. As a result, it is not possible at this time to estimate a range of potential exposure, if any, for amounts that may be payable in connection with these matters and loss contingency accruals have not been established. It is possible that an adverse ruling or rulings may have a material adverse impact on Navient, Navient Solutions and/or their affiliates or on the financial ability of the depositor, the servicer or a seller to fulfill an obligation to purchase or repurchase trust student loans in connection with a breach of representation, warranty or covenant.

In January 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the CFPB) and Attorneys General for the State of Illinois and the State of Washington initiated civil actions naming Navient and several of its subsidiaries (including Navient Solutions) as defendants alleging violations of certain Federal and State consumer protection statutes, including the CFPA, FCRA, FDCPA and various state consumer protection laws. The Attorneys General for the States of Pennsylvania, California, Mississippi, and New Jersey also initiated actions against Navient and certain subsidiaries alleging violations of various state and federal consumer protection laws based upon similar alleged acts or failures to act. In addition to these matters, a number of lawsuits have been filed by nongovernmental parties or, in the future, may be filed by additional governmental or nongovernmental parties seeking damages or other remedies related to similar issues raised by the CFPB and the State Attorneys General. In January 2022, Navient entered into a series of Consent Judgment and Orders (the “Agreements”) with 40 State Attorneys General to resolve all matters in dispute related to the State Attorneys General cases as well as the related investigations, subpoenas, civil investigative demands and inquiries from various other state regulators.

Due to developments in the second half of 2023 and the first half of 2024 in connection with Navient’s CFPB matter, Navient concluded a loss was probable and reasonably estimable. As of June 30, 2024, the contingency loss liability was $105 million. Navient reached an agreement to settle the CFPB lawsuit in September 2024. While Navient does not agree with the CFPB’s allegations, this resolution is consistent with Navient’s go-forward activities and is an important positive milestone in Navient’s transformation. As part of the settlement, pursuant to which Navient did not admit to any wrongdoing, Navient agreed to pay $120 million, which includes a $100 million payment that will be used by the CFPB to make payments to certain borrowers as determined by the CFPB, in addition to a $20 million penalty. In light of the contingency loss liability established in the amount of $105 million as of June 30, 2024, there was an additional $18 million of contingency expense recorded in third-quarter 2024. The $120 million was paid prior to September 30, 2024. The settlement prohibits Navient from servicing federal student loans (other than in the role as master servicer of Navient’s FFELP Loan portfolio), and further prohibits Navient from purchasing any FFELP Loans in the future. These restrictions are not expected to have a material impact on Navient’s business as Navient had already exited its Direct loan servicing contract with the Department of Education in 2021, and entered into an agreement with MOHELA to service Navient’s FFELP Loan portfolio in May 2024. It is not anticipated that the other requirements of the settlement will impact Navient’s go-forward business plans or operations.

The following three paragraphs are disclosure received from Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”).

In 2014 and 2015, several investors sued several trustees of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) trusts, including DBNTC, concerning the trustees’ administration of RMBS trusts. These cases generally alleged that the RMBS trustees failed to perform purported duties, as trustees for private-label RMBS trusts, to enforce breaches of representations and warranties as to mortgage loans held by the trusts and to enforce breaches by servicers of their mortgage loan servicing obligations for the trusts.

Investors have sued DBNTC in nine of these cases. DBNTC has settled two cases brought by funds managed by Blackrock Advisors, LLC, PIMCO-Advisors, L.P. and others; settled two cases brought by Royal Park Investments SA/NV; obtained summary judgment in one case, brought by certain special purpose entities including Phoenix Light SF Limited; and obtained a dismissal in one case, brought by the Western and Southern Life Insurance Company and five related entities. In addition, the three cases described below remain active.

On November 7, 2014, the National Credit Union Administration Board (“NCUA”), as an investor in 121 RMBS trusts, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against DBNTC as trustee of those trusts, alleging violations of the U.S. Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (“TIA”) and the New York Streit Act (“Streit Act”) for DBNTC’s alleged failure to perform certain purported statutory and contractual duties. On March 5, 2015, NCUA amended its complaint to assert claims as an investor in 97 of the 121 RMBS trusts that were the subject of its first complaint. The amended complaint alleged violations of the TIA and Streit Act, as well as breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the covenant of good faith, negligence, gross negligence and negligent misrepresentation. NCUA’s complaint alleged that the trusts at issue suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $17.2 billion, but the complaint did not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On May 1, 2015, DBNTC filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On July 31, 2018, the court issued an order that, among other things, denied DBNTC’s motion to dismiss without prejudice to its renewal. On August 31, 2018, NCUA filed a letter informing the court that it intended to: (i) drop all of its claims as to 60 of the 97 trusts at issue; (ii) drop its claims as to certain, but not all, certificates for 3 additional trusts; and (iii) move for leave to file an amended complaint bringing claims as to the remaining 37 trusts at issue. On October 5, 2018, NCUA filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint that asserted claims as to only 37 of the 97 trusts that were originally at issue, and added new claims for a declaratory judgment and breach of contract arising out of the payment from trust funds of DBNTC’s legal fees and expenses in NCUA’s action and in other actions brought by investors against DBNTC for alleged breaches of its duties as an RMBS trustee. On November 5, 2018, DBNTC filed a motion to stay NCUA’s new claims relating to payment from trust funds of DBNTC’s legal fees and expenses and all related discovery. On October 15, 2019, the court: (i) granted in part NCUA’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint; and (ii) granted DBNTC’s motion to stay NCUA’s new claims relating to payment from trust funds of DBNTC’s legal fees and expenses and all related discovery. The court permitted NCUA to file a second amended complaint asserting claims for: (i) breach of contract arising out of DBNTC’s alleged failure to perform certain purported statutory and contractual duties; and (ii) declaratory judgment and breach of contract arising out of the payment from trust funds of DBNTC’s legal fees and expenses. The court denied NCUA’s request to assert additional claims for: (i) negligence and gross negligence; and (ii) breach of fiduciary duty. On October 21, 2019, NCUA filed a second amended complaint. On November 15, 2019, DBNTC filed an answer to the second amended complaint. On June 11, 2021, NCUA filed a third amended complaint, the substance of which was unchanged from the second amended complaint. On July 1, 2021, DBNTC filed an answer to the third amended complaint. On October 5, 2021, NCUA filed a fourth amended complaint, the substance of which was unchanged from the third amended complaint. On October 25, 2021, DBNTC filed an answer to the fourth amended complaint. On February 4, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation in which NCUA agreed to voluntarily dismiss with prejudice all claims as to 19 trusts. On February 28, 2022, both parties filed motions for partial summary judgment, which have been fully briefed. Discovery is ongoing.

On December 23, 2015, Commerzbank AG (“Commerzbank”), as an investor in 50 RMBS trusts, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against DBNTC as trustee of the trusts, asserting claims for violations of the TIA and New York’s Streit Act, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and breach of the covenant of good faith, based on DBNTC’s alleged failure to perform its duties as trustee for the trusts. Commerzbank alleges that DBNTC caused it to suffer “hundreds of millions of dollars in losses,” but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On April 29, 2016, Commerzbank filed an amended complaint. The amended complaint asserts the same claims as did the original complaint, and, like the original complaint, alleges that DBNTC caused Commerzbank to suffer “hundreds of millions of dollars in losses,” but does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On May 27, 2016, DBNTC filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On February 10, 2017, the court granted in part and denied in part DBNTC’s motion to dismiss. The court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to Commerzbank’s claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and claim under the Streit Act, dismissing those claims with prejudice. The court also granted the motion to dismiss with respect to Commerzbank’s claim under the TIA as to the 46 trusts at issue governed by pooling and servicing agreements, dismissing that claim with prejudice as to those 46 trusts. The court also granted the motion to dismiss, without prejudice, with respect to Commerzbank’s breach of contract claim as to ten trusts whose governing agreements limit the right to file suit under the governing agreements to certain specified parties, including the registered holder of a certificate issued by the trust. The court held that, although Commerzbank has not received authorization from the registered holder of the certificates at issue to file suit, it may still obtain that authorization from the registered holder. The court denied the remainder of the motion to dismiss. Therefore, with the exception of the claims relating to the ten trusts for which Commerzbank has not received authorization to file suit, Commerzbank’s claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence will proceed. Commerzbank’s claim under the TIA as to the four trusts governed by agreements other than pooling and servicing agreements will also proceed. On May 1, 2017, DBNTC filed an answer to the amended complaint. On November 30, 2017, Commerzbank filed a second amended complaint that names Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“DBTCA”) as a defendant in addition to DBNTC. DBTCA serves as trustee for 1 of the 50 trusts at issue. DBNTC serves as trustee for the other 49 trusts at issue. Commerzbank’s second amended complaint brings claims for violation of the TIA; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence; violation of the Streit Act; and breach of the covenant of good faith. However, in the second amended complaint, Commerzbank acknowledges that the court previously dismissed its TIA claims for the trusts governed by pooling and servicing agreements, as well as its Streit Act claims and claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, and Commerzbank only includes these claims to preserve any rights on appeal. The second amended complaint alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA caused Commerzbank to suffer “hundreds of millions of dollars in losses,” but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On January 29, 2018, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the second amended complaint. On December 7, 2018, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion for summary judgment. Also on December 7, 2018, Commerzbank, jointly with the Phoenix Light plaintiffs, filed a motion for partial summary judgment. On February 8, 2022, the court issued an order in which it granted in part DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment. As a result of that order, many of plaintiffs’ claims and theories were dismissed with prejudice. The operative scheduling order contemplates that a second phase of summary judgment briefing will be completed by January 23, 2025.

The following four paragraphs are disclosure received from Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“DBTCA”).

In 2014 and 2015, several investors sued several trustees of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) trusts, including DBTCA, concerning the trustees’ administration of RMBS trusts. These cases generally alleged that the RMBS trustees failed to perform purported duties, as trustees for private-label RMBS trusts, to enforce breaches of representations and warranties as to mortgage loans held by the trusts and to enforce breaches by servicers of their mortgage loan servicing obligations for the trusts. Investors have sued DBTCA in six of these cases. DBTCA has settled two cases brought by funds managed by Blackrock Advisors, LLC, PIMCO-Advisors, L.P. and others; and obtained summary judgment in one case, brought by certain special purpose entities including Phoenix Light SF Limited. In addition, the two cases described below remain active.

On November 30, 2017, DBTCA was added as a defendant to a case brought by Commerzbank AG (“Commerzbank”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which Commerzbank previously alleged incorrectly that Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”) served as trustee for all 50 of the trusts at issue. On November 30, 2017, Commerzbank filed a second amended complaint that names DBTCA as a defendant in addition to DBNTC. DBTCA serves as trustee for 1 of the 50 trusts at issue. DBNTC serves as trustee for the other 49 trusts at issue. Commerzbank’s second amended complaint brings claims for violation of the U.S. Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (“TIA”); breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence; violation of the New York Streit Act (“Streit Act”); and breach of the covenant of good faith. However, in the second amended complaint, Commerzbank acknowledges that, before DBTCA was added to the case, the court dismissed Commerzbank’s TIA claims for the trusts governed by pooling and servicing agreements, as well as its Streit Act claims and claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, and Commerzbank only includes these claims to preserve any rights on appeal. The second amended complaint alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA caused Commerzbank to suffer “hundreds of millions of dollars in losses,” but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On January 29, 2018, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the second amended complaint. On December 7, 2018, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion for summary judgment. Also on December 7, 2018, Commerzbank, jointly with the Phoenix Light plaintiffs, filed a motion for partial summary judgment. On February 8, 2022, the court issued an order in which it granted in part DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment. As a result of that order, many of plaintiffs’ claims and theories were dismissed with prejudice. The operative scheduling order contemplates that a second phase of summary judgment briefing will be completed by January 23, 2025.

On December 30, 2015, IKB International, S.A. in Liquidation and IKB Deutsche Industriebank A.G. (collectively, “IKB”), as an investor in 37 RMBS trusts, filed a summons with notice in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, against DBNTC and DBTCA as trustees of the trusts. On May 27, 2016, IKB served its complaint asserting claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest, violation of the Streit Act, violation of the TIA, violation of Regulation AB, and violation of Section 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. IKB alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA are liable for over U.S. $268 million in damages. On October 5, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA, together with several other trustees defending lawsuits by IKB, filed a joint motion to dismiss. On January 6, 2017, IKB filed a notice of discontinuance, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to three trusts. On June 20, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to four additional trusts. On January 27, 2021, the court granted in part and denied in part DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss. The court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to IKB’s claims for violations of the Streit Act, Regulation AB, and Section 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, as well as certain aspects of IKB’s claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and violation of the TIA. The court denied the remainder of the motion to dismiss. IKB’s remaining claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest, and violation of the TIA will proceed. On May 10, 2021, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a notice of appeal with the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Department, regarding certain aspects of the court’s order on the motion to dismiss. On May 20, 2021, IKB filed a notice of cross appeal with respect to other aspects of that order. On August 30, 2022, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department affirmed in part and reversed in part the court’s order on the motion to dismiss. After DBNTC and DBTCA appealed the First Department’s decision, on June 15, 2023, the New York Court of Appeals reversed the First Department’s decision in part, dismissing certain additional contract claims, as well as IKB’s claims for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest. On June 2, 2021, IKB filed a motion for re-argument regarding certain aspects of the court’s order on the motion to dismiss, which the court denied on August 3, 2021. On May 13, 2021, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the complaint. On October 28, 2021, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to seven additional trusts. On December 29, 2021, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to one additional trust. On April 22, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to 17 certificates at issue, including all claims as to 5 trusts. On February 28, 2023, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to two trusts, leaving 15 trusts at issue. On November 21, 2023, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to three trusts, leaving 12 trusts at issue. On November 14, 2024, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion for summary judgment. Also on November 14, 2024, IKB filed a motion for partial summary judgment. Those motions are being briefed.

It is DBNTC’s and DBTCA’s belief that it has no pending legal proceedings including, based on DBNTC’s and DBTCA’s current evaluation, the litigation disclosed in the immediate proceeding paragraphs that would materially affect its ability to perform its duties as Trustee under the Indenture for this transaction.

Item 3.

Sales of Securities and Use of Proceeds. None.

Item 4.

Defaults Upon Senior Securities. None.

Item 5.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders. None.

Item 6.

Significant Obligors of Pool Assets. No updates to report.

Item 7.

Change in Sponsor Interest in the Securities. None.

Item 8.

Significant Enhancement Provider Information. No updates to report.

Item 9.

Other Information. None.

Item 10.

Exhibits.

(a)

99.1 Monthly Distribution Report for SLM Student Loan Trust 2010-2 in relation to the distribution for January 2025.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Trust has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

Dated: February 6, 2025	SLM STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2010-2

	By:	NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, the Administrator

	By:	/s/ CHARLES S. BOOHER
	Name:	Charles S. Booher
	Title:	Vice President

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

Exhibit Number		Exhibit

99.1		Monthly Distribution Report for SLM Student Loan Trust 2010-2 in relation to the distribution for January 2025.