Notice2022-03142
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Cboe Rule 5.4 and Make Corresponding Changes to Other Rules
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
February 15, 2022
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8625-8628]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03142]
[[Page 8625]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-94204; File No. SR-CBOE-2021-046]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Cboe
Rule 5.4 and Make Corresponding Changes to Other Rules
February 9, 2022.
I. Introduction
On August 6, 2021, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to allow all complex orders to be quoted and
executed in $0.01 increments and to allow complex orders with any ratio
equal to or greater than one-to-three and less than or equal to three-
to-one to trade electronically.\3\ The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on August 25, 2021.\4\
The Commission received two comment letters regarding the proposal.\5\
Cboe responded to the comments on September 23, 2021.\6\ On September
28, 2021, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\7\ the Commission
designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule
change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings
to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change.\8\ On November 1, 2021, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change.\9\ The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comment on Amendment No. 1 and is approving the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ The term ``complex order'' means an order involving the
concurrent execution of two or more different series in the same
underlying security or index (the ``legs'' or ``components'' of the
complex order), for the same account, occurring at or near the same
time and for the purpose of executing a particular investment
strategy with no more than the applicable number of legs (which
number the Exchange determines on a class-by-class basis). The
Exchange determines in which classes complex orders are eligible for
processing. Unless the context otherwise requires, the term complex
order includes stock-option orders and security future-option
orders. For purposes of Exchange Rules 5.33 and 5.85(b)(1), the term
``complex order'' means a complex order with any ratio equal to or
greater than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-
one (3.00), an Index Combo order, a stock-option order, or a
security future-option order. For the purpose of applying these
ratios to complex orders comprised of legs for both mini-options and
standard options, ten mini-option contracts represent one standard
option contract. For the purpose of applying these ratios to complex
orders comprised of legs for both micro-options and standard
options, 100 micro-option contracts represent one standard option
contract. See Exchange Rule 1.1.
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92709 (August 19,
2021), 86 FR 47529 (``Notice'').
\5\ See letter to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission,
from Alanna Barton, General Counsel, BOX Exchange LLC, dated
September 14, 2021 (``BOX Letter''); and letter from Mary Smith,
dated August 19, 2021 (``Smith Letter''). Comments received
regarding the proposal are available on the Commission's website at:
<a href="https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm</a>.
\6\ See letter to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission,
from Laura G. Dickman, Vice President and Associate General Counsel,
Cboe Options, dated September 23, 2021 (``Exchange Response''). The
Exchange Response is available on the Commission's website at:
<a href="https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm</a>.
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93159 (September 28,
2021), 86 FR 54780 (October 4, 2021). The Commission designated
November 23, 2021, as the date by which the Commission shall approve
or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove, the proposed rule change.
\9\ Amendment No. 1 revises the proposal to provide rationale
for allowing complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than
one-to-three and less than or equal to three-to-one to trade
electronically; provide data indicating that in August 2021, fewer
than one third of the complex orders executed on the Exchange's
trading floor had ratios of greater than three-to-one, so the
significant majority of the approximately 25% of total executed non-
SPX contracts (approximately 27% of total executed contracts) traded
during that time would have been eligible to execute in $0.01
increments; and express the view that the rules of another options
exchange do not clearly specify the minimum trading increment
applicable to complex orders traded on that exchange's trading
floor. Amendment No. 1 is available on the Commission's website at
<a href="https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1
Currently, Exchange Rule 5.4 provides that, except as provided in
Exchange Rule 5.33, the minimum increment for bids and offers on
complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than one-to-three and
less than or equal to three-to-one for equity and index options, and
Index Combo orders, is $0.01 or greater, which the Exchange may
determine on a class-by-class basis, and the legs may be executed in
$0.01 increments. The rule further provides that the minimum increment
for bids and offers on complex orders with any ratio less than one-to-
three or greater than three-to-one for equity and index options (except
for Index Combo orders) is the standard increment for the class
pursuant to Exchange Rule 5.4(a), and the legs may be executed in the
minimum increment applicable to the class pursuant to Exchange Rule
5.4(a).\10\ The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 5.4(a) to
allow complex orders with any ratio to be quoted in increments of $0.01
or greater, as determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis,
and executed in $0.01 increments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The minimum increment for bids and offers on complex orders
in options on the S&P 500 Index (SPX) or on the S&P 100 Index (OEX
and XEO), except for box/roll spreads, is $0.05 or greater, or any
increment, which the Exchange may be determine on a class-by-class
basis. See Exchange Rule 5.4(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that if complex orders cannot be expressed in
increments smaller than the increment for the class (such as $0.05), it
may be difficult for brokers to obtain the desired prices for their
customers' complex orders because the parties to a trade must perform
complicated and time-consuming calculations to break down the orders
into the required contract quantities and prices to fit within the
constraint of executing the orders at a minimum increment other than
$0.01.\11\ In addition, the Exchange notes that the calculation process
for larger-ratio complex orders is time-consuming because these orders
generally are entered in large quantities with a large number of
legs.\12\ As a result, brokers executing larger-ratio complex orders on
active trading days cannot be as efficient in representing other
customer orders they are holding.\13\ The Exchange states that the
proposal to allow larger-ratio complex orders to be quoted and executed
in $0.01 increments will provide market participants with flexibility
in pricing their investment strategies and allow Trading Permit Holders
(``TPHs'') to execute these orders more efficiently and at better
prices for their customers.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530.
\12\ See Exchange Response at 4.
\13\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530.
\14\ See id. at 47530-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal does not extend the complex order priority provisions
applicable to complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than
one-to-three and less than or equal to three-to-one to complex orders
with any ratio less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one.\15\
To apply to electronic
[[Page 8626]]
trading the priority provisions that currently apply to floor-traded
complex orders with any ratio less than one-to-three or greater than
three-to-one,\16\ the proposal amends Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v) to
provide that a complex order that has any ratio less than one-to-three
or greater than three-to-one will not execute at a net price that would
cause any component of the complex strategy to be executed at a price
ahead of a Priority Customer order on the Simple Book \17\ without
improving the BBO \18\ of each component of the complex strategy with a
Priority Customer order at the BBO.\19\ As a result, the proposal will
allow a complex order with any ratio less than one-to-three or greater
than three-to-one to be executed at a net debit or credit price only if
each leg of the order betters the corresponding bid (offer) of a
Priority Customer order(s) in the Simple Book.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530. Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v)
currently provides that the Exchange's system does not execute a
complex order (i.e., a complex order with any ratio equal to or
greater than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-
one (3.00)) pursuant to Exchange Rule 5.33 at a net price that would
cause any component of the complex strategy to be executed at a
price ahead of a Priority Customer Order resting in the Simple Book
without improving the BBO of at least one component of the complex
strategy by at least one minimum increment. Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(1)
states that a complex order (A) with any ratio equal to or greater
than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one
(3.00) or (B) that is an Index Combo order may be executed at a net
debit or credit price without giving priority to equivalent bids
(offers) in the individual series legs that are represented in the
trading crowd or in the Book if the price of at least one leg of the
order improves the corresponding bid (offer) of a Priority Customer
order(s) in the Book by at least one minimum trading increment as
set forth in Rule 5.4(b). Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(2).
\16\ See Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(2) (stating that a complex order
with any ratio less than one-to-three (.333) and greater than three-
to-one (3.00) (except for an Index Combo order) may be executed in
open outcry on the trading floor at a net debit or credit price
without giving priority to equivalent bids (offers) in the
individual series legs that are represented in the trading crowd or
in the Book if each leg of the order betters the corresponding bid
(offer) of a Priority Customer order(s) in the Book on each leg by
at least one minimum trading increment as set forth in Rule 5.4(b)).
\17\ The Simple Book is the electronic book of simple orders and
quotes maintained by the System, which single book is used during
both the Regular Trading Hours and Global Trading Hours trading
sessions. See Exchange Rule 1.1.
\18\ The BBO is the best bid or offer disseminated on the
Exchange.
\19\ Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v) will continue to provide
that a complex order that has any ratio equal to or greater than
one-to-three and less than or equal to three-to-one, or an Index
Combo order, will not execute at a net price that would cause any
component of the complex strategy to be executed at a price ahead of
a Priority Customer Order on the Simple Book without improving the
BBO of at least one component of the complex strategy.
\20\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange asserts that it is unlikely that market participants
would submit orders with any ratio equal to or greater than one-to-
three and less than or equal to three-to-one that is not a bona fide
trading strategy solely for the purpose of trading in $0.01
increments.\21\ First, the Exchange states that adding an extra leg to
a large order to be able to improve the book by $0.01 would be
unnecessary because the order could be executed in an AIM Auction in
$0.01 increments.\22\ Second, the Exchange states that it is unlikely
that other market participants would be willing to execute against an
order that is not a bona fide trading strategy, thereby reducing the
likelihood that a market participant would be able to execute such a
strategy.\23\ Third, the Exchange notes that these orders would be
subject to review by the Exchange's regulatory division, which could
determine that the submission of such orders was in violation of the
Exchange's rules, including Exchange Rule 8.1, which prohibits TPHs
from engaging in acts or practices inconsistent with just and equitable
principles of trade.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47531.
\22\ See id.
\23\ See id.
\24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the Exchange permits complex orders with any ratio less
than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to trade only on the
Exchange's trading floor.\25\ The Exchange proposes to allow these
orders to be traded electronically, as well as in open outcry.\26\ The
Exchange states that electronic trading of these larger-ratio complex
orders will provide investors with additional flexibility in executing
these orders and will increase the investment strategies available to
investors who prefer to or solely trade electronically.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47529.
\26\ See id. at n. 6.
\27\ See Amendment No. 1 at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Summary of Comments and Exchange's Response
The Commission received two comment letters regarding the
proposal.\28\ One commenter stated that the proposal would solely
benefit high-speed traders and result in worse prices for retail
traders due to decreased quotes.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See supra note 5.
\29\ See Smith Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange stated that the proposal is designed to increase the
efficiency of trading larger-ratio, highly complex orders and is not
intended to benefit high-speed traders.\30\ The Exchange further stated
that the proposal has minimal relevance to high-speed traders, who
generally participate in listed options trading as market makers rather
than as brokers conducting agency businesses.\31\ The Exchange
concluded that the proposal ``will have minimal impact on either high-
speed traders or retail traders (or on the simple market), as it is
intended to increase the efficiency and precision available to brokers
attempting to execute highly complicated yet bona-fide multi-leg option
strategies on the Exchange, which strategies are not common among high-
speed traders or retail traders.'' \32\ In addition, the Exchange noted
that the proposal is unrelated to quoting and that the increased number
of complex orders that would be eligible for more flexible pricing
under the proposal could increase the number of complex orders entered
on the Exchange that may leg into the Simple Book, thereby increasing
execution opportunities for resting customer orders.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Exchange Response at 1-2.
\31\ See id. at 2.
\32\ Id. at 3-4.
\33\ See id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another commenter stated that, contrary to statements made in the
proposal, each component leg of s of a multi-leg Qualified Open Outcry
Order (``QOO'') on the BOX Exchange LLC's (``BOX'') trading floor
respects the minimum trading increment for the series (e.g., $0.01,
$0.05, $0.10).\34\ The commenter further stated that multi-leg QOO
Orders do not meet the definition of Complex QOO Order and are treated
like single-leg QOO Orders for purposes of execution and priority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See BOX Letter at 1.
\35\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its response, the Exchange stated that multiple TPHs who are
also members of BOX informed the Exchange that multi-legged orders with
ratios greater than three-to-one or less than one-to-three are executed
regularly on BOX's trading floor in penny increments.\36\ The Exchange
also expressed the view that BOX's rules lack clarity regarding the
increments applicable to QOO Orders that do not satisfy the definition
of a complex order in BOX Rule 7240(a)(7).\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See Exchange Response at 4.
\37\ See id. at 4-5. See also Amendment No. 1 at 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Discussion and Commission Findings
After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\38\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\39\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a
[[Page 8627]]
national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest, and not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers or dealers. The proposal to allow complex orders with a with
any ratio less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to be
quoted and executed in $0.01 increments could provide market
participants with flexibility in pricing these orders and allow TPHs to
execute their customers' orders in these larger-ratio strategies at
better prices. The proposal to allow complex orders with any ratio less
than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to trade electronically
could provide market participants with flexibility in executing these
orders by providing an additional means for trading them. The proposal
will protect the priority of Priority Customer orders resting on the
Simple Book by requiring each component of a complex order with a ratio
less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to execute at a
price that improves the BBO of each component of the order with a
Priority Customer order at the BBO.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this 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).
\39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\40\ See proposed Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v). This
requirement is consistent with Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(2), which
provides that a complex order with any ratio less than one-to-three
(.333) and greater than three-to-one (3.00) (except for an Index
Combo order) may be executed in open outcry on the trading floor at
a net debit or credit price without giving priority to equivalent
bids (offers) in the individual series legs that are represented in
the trading crowd or in the Book if each leg of the order betters
the corresponding bid (offer) of a Priority Customer order(s) in the
Book on each leg by at least one minimum trading increment as set
forth in Exchange Rule 5.4(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission does not believe that the proposal will solely
benefit high-speed traders and result in worse prices for retail
traders due to decreased quotes. As noted above, the proposal will
provide all market participants, including retail customers, with
greater flexibility both in pricing complex orders with any ratio less
than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one, and in executing these
orders, which will be allowed to trade electronically as well as on the
Exchange's floor. With respect to the second comment letter, the
Commission notes that in approving this proposal it is not relying on
statements made in the proposal or in any comment letters regarding
BOX's trading floor.
Finally, unlike the trading systems of some options exchanges,
Cboe's trading system does not generate legging orders on behalf of
complex orders. A legging order (sometimes called a derived order) is
an exchange-generated single-leg limit order on the exchange's limit
order book that represents either the bid or the offer of one component
of a complex order resting on the exchange's complex order book. In
general, a legging order is generated at a price: (i) That matches or
improves upon the best displayed bid or offer on the exchange's single-
leg limit order book; and (ii) at which the net price of the complex
order can be achieved when the other leg is executed against the best
displayed bid or offer on the exchange's single-leg limit order
book.\41\ If an exchange generated legging orders in $0.01 increments
on behalf of complex orders with any ratio less than one-to-three or
greater than three-to-one in a class with a standard trading increment
of $0.05, a complex order priced in a $0.01 increment could generate a
legging order at a price that would not be available to market
participants trading single-leg orders.\42\ If an options market that
generates legging orders in $0.01 increments regardless of the trading
increment for the class wished to allow complex orders with a ratio
less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to trade in $0.01
increments, the inability of single-leg orders to compete on a level
playing field with the legging orders generated on behalf of these
complex orders could raise regulatory concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See e.g., BOX Rule 7240(c); ISE Rule Options 3, Section
7(k); and MIAX Rule 518(a)(9).
\42\ For example, if such an exchange received a complex order
to buy series A and Series B at a net price of $2.13, and there was
an order on the exchange's single-leg book to sell series B for
$1.05, the exchange's system could generate a legging order to sell
series A for $1.08. If the quoting and trading increment for the
class is $0.05, then a market participant that entered a single-leg
order to sell series A would be required to enter its order in a
pricing increment of $0.05 and would not be able to match, or
better, the legging order's price by entering its order in a $0.01
increment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule
Change
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1 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#4c3e392029612f2321212922383f0c3f292f622b233a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ceee9f0f9b1fff3f1f1f9f2e8efdceff9ffb2fbf3ea">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2021-046 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-CBOE-2021-046. This file
number should be included on the 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-CBOE-2021-046, and should be submitted
on or before March 8, 2022.
VI. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1
The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No.
1 in the Federal Register. Amendment No. 1 provides rationale for
allowing complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than one-to-
three and less than or equal to three-to-one to trade electronically.
In addition, Amendment No. 1 provides data indicating that in August
2021, fewer than one third of the complex orders executed on the
Exchange's trading floor had ratios of greater than three-to-one, so
the significant majority of the approximately 25% of total
[[Page 8628]]
executed non-SPX contracts (approximately 27% of total executed
contracts) traded during that time would have been eligible to execute
in $0.01 increments. Amendment No. 1 raises no novel regulatory issues
and provides additional analysis that assists the Commission in
evaluating the Exchange's proposal and determining that it is
consistent with the Act. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\43\ to approve the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\44\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2021-046), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, is approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03142 Filed 2-14-22; 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 February 15, 2022.
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.