Notice2021-18949
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Suspension of and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove Proposed Rule Changes To Amend the MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule To Increase the Monthly Fees for MIAX Express Network Full Service Ports
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 2, 2021
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 168 (Thursday, September 2, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 168 (Thursday, September 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49360-49364]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18949]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-92798; File No. SR-PEARL-2021-33]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Suspension of and
Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or
Disapprove Proposed Rule Changes To Amend the MIAX Pearl Options Fee
Schedule To Increase the Monthly Fees for MIAX Express Network Full
Service Ports
August 27, 2021.
I. Introduction
On July 1, 2021, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX Pearl'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'' or ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change (File Number SR-PEARL-2021-33) to amend the MIAX
Pearl Options Fee Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') to increase monthly fees
for the Exchange's MIAX Express Network Full Service MEO Ports.\3\ The
proposed rule change was immediately effective upon filing with the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\4\ The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July
15, 2021.\5\ The Commission has received no comment letters on the
proposed rule change. Under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,\6\ the
Commission is hereby: (i) Temporarily suspending File Number SR-PEARL-
2021-33; and (ii) instituting proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove File Number SR-PEARL-2021-33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ ``MEO Interface'' or ``MEO'' means a binary order interface
for certain order types as set forth in Rule 516 into the MIAX Pearl
System. See Notice, infra note 5, at 37347 n.3.
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). A proposed rule change may take
effect upon filing with the Commission if it is designated by the
exchange as ``establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the self-regulatory organization on any person, whether
or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization.''
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
\5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92365 (July 9,
2021), 86 FR 37347 (``Notice'').
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
MIAX Pearl proposes to increase the monthly fees for Full Service
MEO Ports, which fee increases became effective July 1, 2021.\7\ The
Exchange states that Full Service MEO Ports are used for by options
Members to submit
[[Page 49361]]
quotes and orders and allow for a higher throughput rates than other
ports offered by the Exchange, such as FIX ports.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37347.
\8\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37349.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full Service MEO Ports are of two types: Bulk and Single.\9\ An
options Member using Full Service MEO Ports may be allocated up to two
(2) Full Service MEO Ports for each Matching Engine to which it
connects (two Bulk, two Single, or one of each), and the monthly fee
for Full Service MEO Port use will be determined by volume, according
to tiered schedules.\10\ More specifically, the Exchange assesses
Members Full Service MEO Port fees based upon the monthly total volume
executed by a Member and its Affiliates \11\ on the Exchange across all
origin types, not including Excluded Contracts,\12\ as compared to the
Total Consolidated Volume (``TCV''),\13\ in all MIAX Pearl-listed
options, with separate schedules for Bulk and Single.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37348 n. 5-6. ``Full Service
MEO Port--Bulk'' means an MEO port that supports all MEO input
message types and binary bulk order entry ``Full Service MEO Port--
Single'' means an MEO port that supports all MEO input message types
and binary order entry on a single order-by-order basis, but not
bulk orders.
\10\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37348. The Exchange states
that it currently has twelve matching engines, which means that for
a single monthly fee, a Member may receive up to twenty-four Full
Service MEO Ports for that single fee. Id.
\11\ ``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at
least 75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each
firm's Form BD, Schedule A, or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an
Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an Appointed
Market Maker). See Notice, supra note 5, at 37348 n.11.
\12\ ``Excluded Contracts'' means any contracts routed to an
away market for execution. See Notice, supra note 5, at 37348 n.12.
\13\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
total national volume in those classes listed on MIAX Pearl for the
month for which the fees apply, excluding consolidated volume
executed during the period of time in which the Exchange experiences
an Exchange System Disruption (solely in the option classes of the
affected Matching Engine). See Notice, supra note 5, at 37348 n.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to increase fees for all Full Service MEO
Port as follows:
For Full Service MEO Ports--Bulk, if the Member's relevant monthly
volume falls within the parameters of:
<bullet> Tier 1 (up to 0.30% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $3,000 to $5,000;
<bullet> Tier 2 (above 0.30%, up to 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee
would increase from $4,500 to $7,500; and
<bullet> Tier 3 (above 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $5,000 to $10,000.
For Full Service MEO Ports--Single, if the Member's relevant
monthly volume falls within the parameters of:
<bullet> Tier 1 (up to 0.30% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $2,000 to $2,500;
<bullet> Tier 2 (above 0.30%, up to 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee
would increase from $3,375 to $3,500; and
<bullet> Tier 3 (above 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $3,750 to $4,500.
III. Suspension of the Proposed Rule Change
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,\14\ at any time within
60 days of the date of filing of an immediately effective proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act,\15\ the Commission
summarily may temporarily suspend the change in the rules of a self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') if it appears to the Commission that
such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. As discussed below, the Commission believes a temporary
suspension of the proposed rule change is necessary and appropriate to
allow for additional analysis of the proposed rule change's consistency
with the Act and the rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In support of the proposed fee increases, the Exchange argues
principally that the fees for Full Service MEO Ports are constrained by
competitive forces, and that this is supported by their revenue and
cost analysis. In particular, the Exchange states that there are 16
options markets that are ``highly competitive'' and that reliance on
competitive markets is an appropriate means to ensure equitable and
reasonable prices.\16\ In further support of its argument that
competitive forces constrain its proposed Full Service MEO Port fee
increases, the Exchange states that there is no regulatory requirement
that any market participant connect to the Exchange or that any market
participant connect at any specific connection speed.\17\ The Exchange
further states no options market participant is required by rule,
regulation, or competitive forces to be a Member of the Exchange, which
the Exchange believes is illustrated by the fact that it is unaware of
any one options exchange whose membership includes every registered
broker-dealer.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See id. at 37350. The Exchange adds that the Exchange had
combined market share of 5.31% in June 2021 and it is aware of no
evidence that this provides the Exchange with anti-competitive
pricing power.
\17\ See id. at 37354.
\18\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37454-55.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also states that the proposed fees are designed to
recover a portion of the costs associated with directly accessing the
Exchange and that the proposed increases are reasonable and appropriate
to allow the Exchange to offset expenses the Exchange has and will
incur in relation to providing the Full Service MEO Ports.\19\ The
Exchange provides an analysis of its revenues, costs, and profitability
associated with these fees, which it references as ``Proposed Access
Fees.'' The Exchange states that this analysis reflects an extensive
cost review in which the Exchange analyzed every expense item in the
Exchange's general expense ledger to determine whether each such
expense relates to the Proposed Access Fees, and, if such expense did
so relate, what portion (or percentage) of such expense actually
supports the access services.\20\ The Exchange states that this
analysis shows fee increase will not result in excessive pricing or
supra-competitive profits when compared to the Exchange's annual
expense associated with providing the MEO Ports versus the annual
revenue for the MEO Ports.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37349.
\20\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37350. The Exchange also
states that no expense amount is allocated twice and the expenses
only cover the MIAX Pearl options market. Id. at 37354. Expenses
associated with the MIAX Pearl equities market are accounted for
separately and are not within the scope of this filing. See id. at
37384.
\21\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that for 2021, the total annual expense for
providing the access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees
for the Exchange is projected to be approximately $897,084.\22\ The
$897,084 in projected total annual expense is comprised of the
following, all of which the Exchange states are directly related to the
access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees: (1) Third-
party expense, relating to fees paid by the Exchange to third-parties
for certain products and services; and (2) internal expense, relating
to the internal costs of the Exchange to provide the services
associated with the Proposed Access Fees. The Exchange states that the
$897,084 in projected total annual expense is directly related to the
access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees, and not any
other product or service offered by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37351.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that the total third-party expense, relating to
fees paid by the Exchange to third-parties for
[[Page 49362]]
certain products and services for the Exchange to be able to provide
the access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees is
projected to be $40,166 for 2021.\23\ The Exchange represents that it
determined whether third-party expenses related to the access services
associated with the Proposed Access Fees, and, if such expense did so
relate, determined what portion (or percentage) of such expense
represents the cost to the Exchange to provide access services
associated with the Proposed Access Fees. This includes allocating a
portion of fees paid to: (1) Equinix, for data center services
(approximately 1.80% of the Exchange's total applicable Equinix
expense); (2) Zayo Group Holdings, Inc. for network services
(approximately 0.90%); (3) Secure Financial Transaction Infrastructure
and various other services providers (approximately 0.90%); and (4)
various other hardware and software providers (approximately 0.90%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37351-52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Exchange states that the total internal expense,
relating to the internal costs of the Exchange to provide the access
services associated with the Proposed Access Fees, is projected to be
$856,918 for 2021.\24\ The Exchange represents that: (1) The Exchange's
employee compensation and benefits expense relating to providing the
access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees is projected
to be $783,513, which is a portion of the Exchange's total projected
expense of $9,163,894 for employee compensation and benefits
(approximately 8.55%); (2) the Exchange's depreciation and amortization
expense relating to providing the access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees is projected to be $64,456, which is a portion of
the Exchange's total projected expense of $2,864,716 for depreciation
and amortization (approximately 2.25%); \25\ and (3) the Exchange's
occupancy expense relating to providing the access services associated
with the Proposed Access Fees is projected to be $8,949, which is a
portion of the Exchange's total projected expense of $497,180 for
occupancy (approximately 1.80%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37352-53.
\25\ The Exchange states that the total projected expense of
$2,864,716 for depreciation and amortization differs from the
projected expense of depreciation and amortization projected by the
Exchange in a different filing (SR-PEARL-2021-32) because the
Exchange factors in the depreciation of its own internally developed
software when assessing costs for Full Service MEO Ports, resulting
in a higher depreciation expense number in this filing. See Notice,
supra note 5, at 37353, n.30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that this cost and revenue analysis shows that
the proposed rule change will not result in excessive pricing or supra-
competitive profit.\26\ The Exchange projects that, on a fully-
annualized basis, the Proposed Access Fees will have an expense of
$897,084 per annum and a projected revenue of $1,467,000 per year,
resulting in a projected profit margin of 39% ($1,467,000 in projected
revenue minus $897,084 in projected expense = $578,916 profit per
year). The Exchange states that this estimated profit margin for Full
Service MEO Port fees is well below the operating profit margins of
other competing exchanges based on financial statements filed by them
in 2019 Form 1 amendments.\27\ The Exchange also states that its
proposed increased Full Service MEO Port fees are in line with, or
cheaper than, the similar port fees or similar membership fees charged
by other options exchanges.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37353.
\27\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37354. The Exchange states
that Nasdaq ISE, LLC's operating profit margin for 2019 was 83% and
Nasdaq PHLX LLC's operating profit margin for 2019 was 67%.
\28\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37349. See also Notice, supra
note 5, at 37348 n.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange further states that its proposed fees are reasonable,
equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange, and its affiliates Miami International Securities Exchange,
LLC (``MIAX'') and MIAX Emerald, LLC (``MIAX Emerald''), are still
recouping the initial expenditures from building out their systems
while ``legacy'' exchanges have already paid for and built their
systems.\29\ The Exchange also notes that its affiliates, MIAX and MIAX
Emerald, also charge fees for their high throughput, low latency MEI
Ports in a similar fashion as the Exchange charges for its MEO
Ports.\30\ Furthermore, the Exchange notes that it has historically
undercharged for Full Service MEO Ports as compared to other options
exchanges and the proposed monthly fee increases for Full Service MEO
Ports would bring the Exchange's fees more in line with that of other
options exchanges, while maintaining a competitive fee structure for
Full Service MEO Ports.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37354.
\30\ See MIAX Fee Schedule, Section (5)(d)(ii); MIAX Emerald Fee
Schedule, Section (5)(d)(ii).
\31\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37349.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that the proposed fees are equitably allocated,
not unfairly discriminatory, and do not impose an unnecessary or
inappropriate burden on competition because the Proposed Access Fees do
not favor certain categories of market participants,\32\ the allocation
of the Proposed Access Fees reflects the network resources consumed by
the various size of the market participants, with the lowest bandwidth
consuming members paying the least, and the highest bandwidth consuming
paying the most; \33\ and options market participants are not forced to
connect to (and purchase MEO Ports from) all options exchanges.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See id. at 37354.
\33\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37355.
\34\ For a more detailed description of the Exchange's
justifications for the proposed rule change, see Notice, supra note
5, at 37349-55.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When exchanges file their proposed rule changes with the
Commission, including fee filings like the Exchange's present proposal,
they are required to provide a statement supporting the proposal's
basis under the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable
to the exchange.\35\ The instructions to Form 19b-4, on which exchanges
file their proposed rule changes, specify that such statement ``should
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support a finding that the
proposed rule change is consistent with [those] requirements.'' \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See 17 CFR 240.19b-4 (Item 3 entitled ``Self-Regulatory
Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for,
the Proposed Rule Change'').
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 6 of the Act, including Sections 6(b)(4), (5), and (8),
require the rules of an exchange to (1) provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable fees among members, issuers, and other persons
using the exchange's facilities; \37\ (2) perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, protect investors
and the public interest, and not be designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers; \38\
and (3) not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
\38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In temporarily suspending the Exchange's fee change, the Commission
intends to further consider whether the proposal to increase fees for
the Exchange's Full Service MEO Ports is consistent with the statutory
requirements applicable to a national securities exchange under the
Act. In particular, the Commission will consider whether the proposed
rule change satisfies the standards under the Act and the rules
thereunder requiring, among other things, that an exchange's rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable fees among members,
issuers, and other persons
[[Page 49363]]
using its facilities; not permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers; and do not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the Commission finds that it is appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of investors, and otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, to temporarily suspend the
proposed rule change.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ For purposes of temporarily suspending the proposed rule
change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the
Proposed Rule Change
In addition to temporarily suspending the proposal, the Commission
also hereby institutes proceedings pursuant to Sections 19(b)(3)(C)
\42\ and 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \43\ to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of
proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any
conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, the
Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to provide
additional comment on the proposed rule change to inform the
Commission's analysis of whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). Once the Commission temporarily
suspends a proposed rule change, Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act
requires that the Commission institute proceedings under Section
19(b)(2)(B) to determine whether a proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
\43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\44\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for possible disapproval under
consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act also
provides that proceedings to determine whether to disapprove a
proposed rule change must be concluded within 180 days of the date
of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed rule change.
See id. The time for conclusion of the proceedings may be extended
for up to 60 days if the Commission finds good cause for such
extension and publishes its reasons for so finding, or if the
exchange consents to the longer period. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, which requires that the
rules of a national securities exchange ``provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and issuers and other persons using its facilities;'' \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be ``designed
to perfect the operation of a free and open market and a national
market system'' and ``protect investors and the public interest,'' and
not be ``designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers;'' \46\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, which requires that the
rules of a national securities exchange ``not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of [the Act].'' \47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in Section III above, the Exchange makes various
arguments in support of the proposal. The Commission believes that
there are questions as to whether the Exchange has provided sufficient
information to demonstrate that the proposal to increase Full Service
MEO Port fees is consistent with the Act and the rules thereunder.
Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden to
demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the [Act]
and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the [SRO]
that proposed the rule change.'' \48\ The description of a proposed
rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a legal
analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all be
sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative Commission
finding,\49\ and any failure of an SRO to provide this information may
result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis to make an
affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act and the applicable rules and regulations.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
\49\ See id.
\50\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
consideration and comment on the issues raised herein, including as to
whether the proposal is consistent with the Act, specifically, with its
requirements that the rules of a national securities exchange provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members, issuers, and other persons using its
facilities; are designed to perfect the operation of a free and open
market and a national market system, and to protect investors and the
public interest; are not designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers; and do not impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act; \51\ as well as any other
provision of the Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Commission's Solicitation of Comments
The Commission requests written views, data, and arguments with
respect to the concerns identified above as well as any other relevant
concerns. Such comments should be submitted by September 23, 2021.
Rebuttal comments should be submitted by October 7, 2021. Although
there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views,
data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule
19b-4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Section 19(b)(2) of the Act grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by an SRO. See Securities
Acts Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs to Accompany S. 249, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th
Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, in
addition to any other comments they may wish to submit about the
proposed rule change.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the proposed rule change, including whether the
proposal is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any
of the following methods:
Electronic Comments
<bullet> Use the Commission's internet comment form (<a href="http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>); or
<bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5b292e373e76383436363e352f281b283e38753c342d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3c4e495059115f5351515952484f7c4f595f125b534a">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
File No. SR-PEARL-2021-33 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
<bullet> Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2021-33. This file
number should be included on the
[[Page 49364]]
subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and
review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The
Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website
(<a href="http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>). Copies of the submission, all
subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the
proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all
written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
PEARL-2021-33 and should be submitted on or before September 23, 2021.
Rebuttal comments should be submitted by October 7, 2021.
VI. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the
Act,\53\ that File Number SR-PEARL-2021-33 be and hereby is,
temporarily suspended. In addition, the Commission is instituting
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
\54\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57) and (58).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\54\
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-18949 Filed 9-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 2, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.