Notice2025-04081
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Codes of Arbitration Procedure To Make Clarifying, Technical, and Procedural Changes to the Arbitrator List Selection Process
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
March 14, 2025
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 49 (Friday, March 14, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 49 (Friday, March 14, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12196-12199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-04081]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-102559; File No. SR-FINRA-2024-022]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Codes of
Arbitration Procedure To Make Clarifying, Technical, and Procedural
Changes to the Arbitrator List Selection Process
March 10, 2025.
I. Introduction
On December 18, 2024, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend the Code of Arbitration
Procedure for Customer Disputes (``Customer Code'') and the Code of
Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes (``Industry Code'')
(together, ``Codes'') to make changes to certain provisions relating to
the arbitrator-selection process. Specifically, the proposed rule
change would amend FINRA Rules 12403 (Cases with Three Arbitrators) and
13403 (Generating and Sending Lists to the Parties) to increase the
odds that non-chair-qualified public arbitrators would be selected for
the list of public arbitrator candidates that is sent to the parties in
certain disputes that have a three-arbitrator panel. In addition, the
proposed rule change would codify certain practices that FINRA has
developed to efficiently administer arbitrator list selection;
establish new timeframes for objecting to requests for additional
information from arbitrators, withdrawing such requests for additional
information, and filing motions to remove arbitrators after disclosures
of causal challenges; and align provisions of the Codes related to the
expungement of customer dispute information.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 101993 (Dec. 19, 2024), 89 FR
106635, 106637 (Dec. 30, 2024) (File No. SR-FINRA-2024-022)
(``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on December 30, 2024.\4\ The public comment period closed on
January 21, 2025. The Commission received comment letters related to
this filing.\5\ On January 27, 2025, FINRA consented to extend until
March 28, 2025, the time period in which the Commission must approve
the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the
proposed rule change.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Notice.
\5\ The comment letters are available at <a href="https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024-022/srfinra2024022.htm">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024-022/srfinra2024022.htm</a>.
\6\ See letter from Bria Adams, Assistant General Counsel, FINRA
(dated Jan. 27, 2025), <a href="https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2025-01/FINRA-2024-022-Extension-3-28-25.pdf">https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2025-01/FINRA-2024-022-Extension-3-28-25.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is publishing this order pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \7\ to institute proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
A. Background
1. FINRA's Arbitration Forum
FINRA's Dispute Resolution Services (``DRS'') provides an
arbitration forum to resolve disputes between customers, member firms,
and associated persons of member firms arising in connection with the
business activities of a member firm or its associated persons, except
disputes involving the insurance business activities of a member firm
that is also an insurance company.\8\ FINRA maintains a roster for each
of the three types of arbitrators that may be appointed to an
arbitration panel to hear a claim: public, non-public, and chairperson
arbitrators.\9\ In general, a ``public'' arbitrator is a person who is
otherwise qualified to serve as an arbitrator and is not disqualified
from service as a public arbitrator due to their current or past ties
to the financial industry.\10\ A ``non-public'' arbitrator is a person
who is otherwise qualified to serve as an arbitrator and is
disqualified from service as a public arbitrator due to their current
or past ties to the financial industry.\11\ A public arbitrator is
eligible to serve as a ``chairperson'' if he or she has completed
FINRA's chairperson training and: (1) has a law degree, is a member of
a bar of at least one jurisdiction, and has served as an arbitrator
through award on at least one arbitration administered by a self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') in which hearings were held; or (2)
has served as an arbitrator through award on at least three
arbitrations administered by a SRO in which hearings were held.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See FINRA Rules 12101, 12200, 12201, 13101, 13200, 13201,
13202.
\9\ See FINRA Rules 12400(b), 13400(b).
\10\ See FINRA Rules 12100(aa), 13100(x).
\11\ See FINRA Rules 12100(t), 13100(r).
\12\ See FINRA Rules 12400(c), 13400(c). In customer disputes,
the chairperson must be a public arbitrator. See FINRA Rule
12400(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Arbitrator-Selection Process
The proposed rule change addresses rules in the Codes that govern
the arbitrator-selection process in certain cases with three
arbitrators. As relevant here, a three-arbitrator panel decides claims
that are greater than $100,000 (exclusive of interest and expenses),
are unspecified, or do not request money damages (unless the parties
agree in writing to one arbitrator).\13\ For claims greater than
$50,000 but not more than $100,000, exclusive of interest and expenses,
the panel will consist of one
[[Page 12197]]
arbitrator unless the parties agree in writing to three.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See FINRA Rules 12401(c), 13401(c).
\14\ See FINRA Rules 12401(b), 13401(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In these cases, the arbitrator-selection process begins with a
computerized list-selection algorithm (the ``list-selection
algorithm''), which generates three pools of available arbitrators from
DRS's rosters for the selected hearing location: one for chair-
qualified public arbitrators, one for public arbitrators (both chair-
qualified and non-chair-qualified), and one for non-public
arbitrators.\15\ From these pools, the list-selection algorithm
randomly generates three lists of arbitrators for the parties.\16\ For
a customer claim, the list-selection algorithm generates one list with
10 chair-qualified public arbitrators, one list with 15 public
arbitrators, and one list with 10 non-public arbitrators.\17\ For an
industry claim between associated persons or between or among member
firms and associated persons,\18\ the list-selection algorithm
generates one list with 10 chair-qualified public arbitrators, one list
with 10 public arbitrators, and one list with 10 non-public
arbitrators.\19\ In each case, the list-selection algorithm generates
the public chairperson list before it generates the public list.\20\
The algorithm then generates the list of public arbitrators, and any
available chair-qualified public arbitrator is eligible for selection
as a public arbitrator so long as he or she was not already selected
for the chairperson list.\21\ In this way, the list-generation
algorithm effectively gives chair-qualified public arbitrators two
chances to appear on a list: once as a chairperson; and, if not
selected for the chairperson list, a second as a public arbitrator.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See FINRA, How Parties Select Arbitrators, <a href="https://www.finra.org/arbitration-mediation/about/arbitration-process/arbitrator-selection">https://www.finra.org/arbitration-mediation/about/arbitration-process/arbitrator-selection</a>.
\16\ See FINRA Rules 12403(a) (Generating Lists in Customer
Cases with Three Arbitrators), 13403(b) (Lists Generated in Disputes
Between Associated Persons or Between or Among Members and
Associated Persons); see also FINRA Rules 12400(a), 13400(a).
\17\ See FINRA Rule 12403(a)(1).
\18\ Three-arbitrator panels also decide industry disputes
between member firms, but those panels do not include public
arbitrators and are therefore not relevant to this proposed rule
change. See FINRA Rule 13403(a).
\19\ See FINRA Rule 13403(b)(2).
\20\ FINRA Rules 12403(a)(2), 13403(b)(3).
\21\ See id.
\22\ Notice at 106636.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once the parties receive the three lists, they may exercise a
specified number of strikes against each list and rank the remaining
arbitrators on each list in order of preference.\23\ The DRS Director
then consolidates the strike and ranking lists and appoints the
highest-ranking arbitrator(s) who survived the parties' strikes.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See FINRA Rules 12403(c)(1), 12403(c)(2), 13404(a),
13404(c).
\24\ See FINRA Rules 12402(e), 12402(f), 12403(d), 12403(e)(1),
13405, 13406.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Proposed Rule Change
1. Generating Public Lists in Cases With Three Arbitrators
The proposed rule change would amend the list-selection algorithm
in certain cases with three arbitrators, increasing the chances that
non-chair-qualified public arbitrators would appear on the public
list.\25\ Specifically, the proposed rule change would provide that,
``[i]n preparing the public list, the list selection algorithm will
provide two chances for selection to public arbitrators that are not
chair-qualified, and will [continue to] provide one chance for
selection to chair-qualified public arbitrators.'' \26\ Although non-
chair-qualified public arbitrators would have two chances for selection
to the public list, the proposed rule change would provide that ``[a]n
individual arbitrator cannot appear more than once on the public list
selected for the same case.'' \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Notice at 106636.
\26\ Proposed Rules 12403(a)(3), 13403(b)(4). FINRA stated that
the list-selection algorithm would implement this proposed rule
change by ``including the names of public arbitrators who are not
chair qualified twice on the roster of available public arbitrators
used to randomly generate a Public List.'' Notice at 106636 n.21.
\27\ Proposed Rules 12403(a)(3), 13403(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Other Proposed Rule Changes
FINRA stated that the proposed rule change would also codify
certain practices that it has developed to efficiently administer
arbitrator list selection; establish new timeframes for objecting to
requests for additional information from arbitrators, withdrawing such
requests for additional information, and filing motions to remove
arbitrators after disclosures of causal challenges; and align
provisions of the Codes related to the expungement of customer dispute
information.\28\ The Commission describes each proposed rule change in
turn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Notice at 106637.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Sending Arbitrator Lists to the Parties
The Codes currently provide that the DRS Director will send the
list(s) generated by the list-selection algorithm ``to all parties at
the same time, within approximately 30 days after the last answer is
due, regardless of the parties' agreement to extend any answer due
date.'' \29\ FINRA stated, however, that in practice the DRS sends the
arbitrator lists to the parties ``well within the 30-day timeframe
provided by the rules.'' \30\ FINRA stated that the proposed rule
change would codify current practice by amending FINRA Rules
12402(c)(1), 12403(b)(1), and 13403(c)(1) to shorten the 30-day
timeframe to 20 days.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ FINRA Rules 12402(c)(1), 12403(b)(1), 13403(c)(1).
\30\ Notice at 106637.
\31\ See proposed Rules 12402(c)(1), 12403(b)(1), 13403(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Arbitrator-Disclosure Reports
Current FINRA rules provide that the parties will receive
``employment history for the past 10 years'' and other background
information for each arbitrator on an arbitrator list.\32\ FINRA stated
that its practice, however, is to request each arbitrator's full post-
education employment history and send ``this employment history and
other background information to the parties'' in a ``disclosure
report.'' \33\ FINRA stated that the proposed rule change would codify
this practice by removing ``for the past 10 years'' from the relevant
rules and clarifying that employment history and background information
will be provided in a ``disclosure report.'' \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ FINRA Rules 12402(c)(1), 12403(b)(1), 12404(a),
13403(c)(1), 13407(a), 13804(b)(3)(A)(i), 13804(b)(3)(B)(i).
\33\ Notice at 106637.
\34\ See id. at 106637; proposed Rules 12402(c)(1), 12403(b)(1),
12404(a), 13403(c)(1), 13407(a), 13804(b)(3)(A)(i),
13804(b)(3)(B)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Requests for Additional Information About Arbitrators
The Codes provide that ``[i]f a party requests additional
information about an arbitrator, the [DRS] Director will request the
additional information from the arbitrator[ ] and will send any
response to all the parties at the same time.'' \35\ The proposed rule
change would make three changes related to this process.\36\ First,
FINRA stated that the proposed rule change would codify
[[Page 12198]]
current practice by expressly providing that a party may request
additional information about an arbitrator ``at any stage of the
proceeding'' by filing such request with the Director and serving it
upon all other parties.\37\ Second, FINRA stated that the proposed rule
change would amend FINRA Rules 12402, 12403, and 13403 to provide that
a request for additional information about an arbitrator ``may omit any
information that would reveal the identity of the party making the
request.'' \38\ The proposed rule change also would provide that ``[i]f
no opposing party objects to the request for additional information,
the [DRS] Director and the parties shall not disclose the identity of
the requesting party'' to the arbitrator or the panel.\39\ Finally, the
proposed rule change would amend FINRA Rules 12402, 12403, and 13403 to
provide that an opposing party may object to a request for additional
information by filing its objection with the Director and serving it
upon all other parties ``[w]ithin ten days of receipt of the request''
for additional information.\40\ The proposed rule change also would
provide that the Director will forward the request for additional
information along with any objections to the arbitrator who is the
subject of the request ``[a]fter five days have elapsed from the
service of any objections and provided that the request for additional
information has not been withdrawn.'' \41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ FINRA Rules 12402(c)(2), 12403(b)(2), 13403(c)(2).
\36\ FINRA stated that the proposed rule change would also make
``technical changes'' that would result from these proposed rule
changes. Notice at 106637 n.26. FINRA stated that the proposed rule
change would relocate--without substantive changes--some text from
FINRA Rules 12402(c)(2), 12403(b)(2), and 13403(c)(2) to new
proposed sub-sections within the same FINRA rules. Id. Specifically,
proposed Rules 12402(c)(2)(D), 12403(b)(2)(D), and 13403(c)(2)(D)
would provide that ``[t]he Director will send any response from the
arbitrator to all of the parties at the same time.'' In addition,
proposed Rules 12402(c)(2)(E), 12403(b)(2)(E), and 13403(c)(2)(E)
would provide that ``[w]hen a party requests additional information,
the Director may, but is not required to, toll the time for parties
to return the ranked lists. . . .''
\37\ Proposed Rules 12402(c)(2)(A), 12403(b)(2)(A),
13403(c)(2)(A); Notice at 106638.
\38\ Id.
\39\ Proposed Rules 12402(c)(2)(C), 12403(b)(2)(C),
13403(c)(2)(C).
\40\ Proposed Rules 12402(c)(2)(B), 12403(b)(2)(B),
13403(c)(2)(B).
\41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Striking Arbitrators for Any Reason
FINRA Rules 12402(d)(1), 12403(c)(1)(A), 12403(c)(2)(A), and
13404(a) and (b) provide that each separately represented party may
strike a certain number of arbitrators from the lists of arbitrators
that the list-selection algorithm generates.\42\ All but one of these
provisions--FINRA Rule 12403(c)(1)(A) (governing striking arbitrators
from the non-public arbitrator list)--expressly provides that a party
may strike arbitrators from a list ``for any reason.'' \43\ FINRA
stated that even though FINRA Rule 12403(c)(1)(A) lacks this language,
``there are no limitations on the reasons a party may strike an
arbitrator.'' \44\ The proposed rule change would amend FINRA Rule
12403(c)(1)(A) ``to expressly provide that each separately represented
party may strike any or all of the arbitrators from the Non-Public List
for any reason.'' \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ FINRA Rules 12402(d)(1), 12403(c)(1)(A), 12403(c)(2)(A),
13404(a), 13404(b).
\43\ Id.
\44\ Notice at 106638.
\45\ Id. (emphasis in original); proposed Rule 12403(c)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Electronic List Selection
FINRA Rules 12402(d)(1), 12403(c)(1)(A), 12403(c)(2)(A), and
13404(a) and (b) currently provide that each separately represented
party may strike arbitrators from the list(s) of arbitrators ``by
crossing through the names of the arbitrators.'' \46\ FINRA stated
that, in practice, parties generally use a web-based system, the Party
Portal, to complete arbitrator list selection electronically.\47\ FINRA
stated that the proposed rule change would amend FINRA Rules
12402(d)(1), 12403(c)(1)(A), 12403(c)(2)(A), and 13404(a) and (b) to
delete the phrase ``by crossing through the names of the arbitrators.''
\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ FINRA Rules 12402(d)(1), 12403(c)(1)(A), 12403(c)(2)(A),
13404(a), 13404(b).
\47\ Notice at 106639. The term ``Party Portal'' means ``the
web-based system that is accessible by arbitration and mediation
parties and their representatives. The Party Portal allows invited
participants to access a secure section of FINRA's website to submit
documents and view their arbitration and mediation case information
and documents.'' See FINRA Rules 12100(v), 13100(t).
\48\ Notice at 106639.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
f. Extensions of Time To Complete Ranked Lists
FINRA rules currently provide that after striking and ranking the
arbitrators on the arbitrator lists, each separately represented party
must return their ranked lists to the DRS director ``either within 20
days or no more than 20 days after the date upon which the Director
sent the lists to the parties.'' \49\ FINRA stated that ``parties
frequently file requests with the Director to extend the 20-day
deadline only after it has elapsed.'' \50\ Although FINRA rules permit
the Director to extend or modify the deadline for good cause,\51\ FINRA
stated that, in practice, the Director typically denies requests made
after the deadline has expired absent a showing of extraordinary
circumstances.\52\ The proposed rule change would codify current
practice by expressly providing that, ``[a]bsent extraordinary
circumstances, the Director will not grant a party's request for an
extension to complete the ranked list[s] that is filed after the
deadline has elapsed.'' \53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Id.; see FINRA Rules 12402(d)(3), 12403(c)(3), 12404(a),
13404(d), 13407(a).
\50\ Notice at 106639.
\51\ FINRA Rules 12207(c), 13207(c).
\52\ Notice at 106639.
\53\ Id.; see proposed Rules 12402(d)(3), 12403(c)(3), 12404(a),
13404(d), 13407(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
g. Agreements To Remove Arbitrators
Current FINRA guidance states that parties may agree to remove an
arbitrator.\54\ The proposed rule change would codify this guidance by
amending FINRA Rules 12407 and 13410 to expressly provide that, ``at
any stage of the arbitration proceeding, the Director may remove an
arbitrator if all of the named parties agree in writing to the
arbitrator's removal.'' \55\ However, the proposed rule change also
would provide that ``parties may not agree to remove an arbitrator who
is considering a request to expunge customer dispute information,
except that a party shall be permitted to challenge'' for cause any
arbitrator selected pursuant to FINRA Rule 12407(a)(1) or (b) or FINRA
Rule 13410(a)(1) or (b).\56\ FINRA stated that this proposed rule
change is consistent with recent changes it made to the expungement
process.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ Notice at 106639.
\55\ Id.; proposed Rules 12407(d)(1), 13410(d)(1). FINRA stated
that ``[r]equests to remove an arbitrator may not be granted when
there are extraordinary circumstances which make removal
inappropriate (e.g., requests based on discriminatory grounds).''
Notice at 106639 n.35.
\56\ Id. at 106639; see proposed Rules 12407(d)(2), 13410(d)(2).
\57\ Notice at 106639-40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
h. Prohibition on the Disclosure of Party-Initiated Challenges To
Remove Arbitrators
FINRA Rules 12407 and 13410 permit parties to challenge arbitrators
for cause.\58\ Current DRS guidance advises the parties that ``they may
not inform the panel of an opposing party's causal challenge.'' \59\
The proposed rule change would codify this guidance by expressly
providing that ``a party may not inform the panel or arbitrator of
another party's request to remove an arbitrator for cause.'' \60\ The
proposed rule change would also create a remedy if a party discloses to
the arbitrator or panel an opposing party's request to remove an
arbitrator for cause.\61\ Specifically, the proposed rule change would
provide that the party that requested removal of the arbitrator ``may
file with the Director within five days of being made aware of the
disclosure a written motion for removal of the arbitrator.'' \62\ The
proposed rule change also would provide that ``[i]f the requesting
party
[[Page 12199]]
does not file a motion for removal of the arbitrator within five days
of being made aware of the disclosure, then the requesting party shall
forfeit the opportunity to request removal of the arbitrator because of
the disclosure.'' \63\ In addition, the proposed rule change would
provide that, absent extraordinary circumstances, the DRS Director
shall grant such a motion if the party that made the request to remove
the arbitrator timely files the motion.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ FINRA Rules 12407, 13410.
\59\ Notice at 106640.
\60\ Id.; proposed Rules 12407(e)(1), 13410(e)(1).
\61\ Notice at 106640.
\62\ Proposed Rule 12407(e)(2), 13410(e)(2).
\63\ Id.
\64\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Updating Cross-References
FINRA Rules 13406(c) and 13411(d) cross-reference FINRA Rule
13100(r)(2) and (r)(3) to incorporate the definition of ``non-public
arbitrator.'' \65\ FINRA stated that prior to 2017, FINRA Rule
13100(r)(1), (r)(2), (r)(3), and (r)(4) ``listed the specific criteria
for inclusion on FINRA's non-public arbitrator roster.'' \66\ FINRA
stated that due to a rule change in 2017 that eliminated those four
sub-sections, the aforementioned cross-references to FINRA Rule
13100(r) are outdated.\67\ The proposed rule change would update FINRA
Rules 13406(c) and 13411(d) with correct cross-references to FINRA Rule
13100(x)(2) through (11).\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ FINRA Rules 13406(c), 13411(d).
\66\ Notice at 106641.
\67\ See id.
\68\ Notice at 106641; proposed Rules 13406(c), 13411(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove File No.
SR-FINRA-2024-022 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration
The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or disapproved.\69\ Institution of
proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy
issues raised by the proposed rule change. Institution of proceedings
does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with
respect to the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act, the Commission
is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under
consideration.\70\ The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow
for additional analysis and input concerning whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Request for Written Comments
The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposed rule change. In particular, the Commission invites
the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules
thereunder.
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.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, as amended by the
Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29, 89 Stat. 97
(1975), 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 a self-regulatory organization. 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change should be approved
or disapproved by April 4, 2025. Any person who wishes to file a
rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by
April 18, 2025.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Electronic Comments
<bullet> Use the Commission's internet comment form (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>); or
<bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c1b3b4ada4eca2aeacaca4afb5b281b2a4a2efa6aeb7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0674736a632b65696b6b636872754675636528616970">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-FINRA-2024-022 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-FINRA-2024-022. 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="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. Do not include
personal identifiable information in submissions; you should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. We may
redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material
that is obscene or subject to copyright protection.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-FINRA-2024-022 and
should be submitted on or before April 4, 2025. If comments are
received, any rebuttal comments should be submitted on or before April
18, 2025.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-04081 Filed 3-13-25; 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 March 14, 2025.
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.