Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend the Panel Composition Rules of the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes, 28318-28319 [E9-13967]
Download as PDF
28318
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 113 / Monday, June 15, 2009 / Notices
(5) A minimum of 100,000 Shares will
be required to be outstanding at the start
of trading.24
This approval order is based on the
Exchange’s representations.
For the foregoing reasons, the
Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act 25 and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a
national securities exchange.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,26 that the
proposed rule change (SR–NYSEArca–
2009–30), as modified by Amendment
No. 1 thereto, be, and it hereby is,
approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.27
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–13969 Filed 6–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–60061; File No. SR–FINRA–
2009–011]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change as Modified by
Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend
the Panel Composition Rules of the
Code of Arbitration Procedure for
Industry Disputes
June 5, 2009.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
On March 4, 2009, the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(‘‘FINRA’’) (f/k/a National Association
of Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’))
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’’ or ‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
change to amend the panel composition
rules of the Code of Arbitration
Procedure for Industry Disputes
(‘‘Industry Code’’). On April 7, 2009,
FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change. The proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment
No. 1, was published for comment in
24 See proposed NYSE Arca Equities Rule
8.700(e)(1)(A).
25 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
26 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
27 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:47 Jun 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
the Federal Register on May 4, 2009.3
The Commission received no comments
on the proposed rule change. This order
approves the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1.
I. Description of the Proposal
FINRA proposed to amend the
Industry Code to change the criteria for
determining the panel composition
when the claim involves an associated
person in industry disputes.
Currently, Rule 13402(a) of the
Industry Code requires an all non-public
panel for disputes between members,
and for employment disputes between
or among members and associated
persons that relate exclusively to
employment contracts, promissory
notes, or receipt of commissions.4 In all
other disputes between or among
members and associated persons, Rule
13402(b) requires a majority public
panel, where one arbitrator would be a
non-public arbitrator and two would be
public arbitrators.5
FINRA proposed to amend the
Industry Code to change the criteria for
determining panel composition when
the claim involves an associated person
in industry disputes.6 Specifically,
FINRA proposed to amend Rule 13402
and related rules of the Industry Code
to:
• Require that the parties receive a
majority public panel for all industry
disputes involving associated persons
(excluding disputes involving statutory
employment discrimination claims
which require a specialized all public
panel); 7
• Clarify that in disputes involving
only members, parties will receive an all
non-public panel; and
• Provide that if a party amends its
pleadings to add an associated person to
a previously all member case, parties
will receive a majority public panel.
Thus, cases involving only members
would have an all non-public panel;
cases involving a member and an
associated person (excluding cases
involving a claim for statutory
3 See Exchange Act Release No. 59836 (April 28,
2009); 74 FR 20519 (May 4, 2009).
4 If the panel consists of one arbitrator, the
arbitrator will be a non-public arbitrator selected
from the non-public chairperson roster described in
Rule 13400(c). See Rule 13402(a).
5 If the panel consists of one arbitrator, the
arbitrator will be a public arbitrator selected from
the chairperson roster described in Rule 12400(c) of
the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Customer
Disputes (‘‘Customer Code’’). See Rule 13402(b).
6 The proposed changes discussed in this order
will not apply to claims filed under the Customer
Code.
7 The proposal would not apply to disputes
involving a claim of statutory employment
discrimination. See Rule 13802.
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
discrimination) would have a majority
public panel; and cases involving an
associated person with a statutory
discrimination claim would have a
specialized all public panel.8 Moreover,
if a member amends its pleadings to add
an associated person, the case would
receive a majority public panel, and the
rules that apply to cases between
associated persons and members would
govern list selection and the
administration of the arbitration
proceeding.
Employment Disputes Involving
Associated Persons
Currently, in employment disputes
between or among members and
associated persons, FINRA requires that
the panel consist of all non-public
arbitrators in cases that arise out of the
employment or termination of
employment of an associated person,
and that relate exclusively to (1)
employment contracts, (2) promissory
notes, or (3) receipt of commissions.
However, if a party adds a claim that
does not meet these criteria, the parties
receive a majority public panel.
FINRA proposed to amend Rule
13402 of the Industry Code to clarify
that for all employment disputes
between or among members and
associated persons (except for statutory
employment discrimination cases), the
parties must select a majority public
panel.9 Rule 13402(a) would be
amended to delete the title of the rule,
which contains the exceptions to the
majority public panel requirement, and
replace it with a concise description,
which clarifies that Rule 13402(a)
would apply to disputes involving only
members. Rule 13402(b) would be
amended to modify the title of the rule
to clarify that for all industry disputes
involving associated persons (excluding
disputes involving statutory
employment discrimination claims), the
parties would receive a majority public
panel. FINRA also proposed to make
similar title changes to Rules 13403(a)
and 13403(b), which govern generating
and sending lists to parties, and to Rules
13406(a) and 13406(b), which govern
appointment of arbitrators and
discretion to appoint arbitrators not on
the list.
8 See Rule 13802(c) (panel composition rule for
statutory employment discrimination claims).
9 The proposed change would be consistent with
the rules and procedures of the former New York
Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’) arbitration forum. In the
NYSE arbitration forum, cases involving associated
persons received a majority public panel because
the rules classified associated persons as nonmembers, and non-members received a majority
public panel. See NYSE Rule 607(a)(1).
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
15JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 113 / Monday, June 15, 2009 / Notices
Employment Disputes Involving Only
Members
FINRA proposed to amend Rule
13402(a) to clarify that, in disputes
involving only members, the parties will
receive an all non-public panel. FINRA
noted that the proposed amendment to
Rule 13402(a) is consistent with the
current rule and its intent, which is that
disputes involving only members
should receive an all non-public panel.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Amendments to Pleadings That Add an
Associated Person
FINRA proposed to add a provision to
Rule 13402(a) to address amended
pleadings that add an associated person
as a party. Under the proposed rule
change, if a member in a dispute
involving only members amends a
pleading to add a party who is an
associated person, the parties will
receive a majority public panel. If lists
of potential arbitrators have not been
sent to parties, the Neutral List
Selection System (NLSS) would
generate three lists as outlined in Rule
13403(b)(2) of the Industry Code.
Specifically, FINRA would send a
public chairperson list, a public
arbitrator list, and a non-public
arbitrator list. If the panel consists of
one arbitrator,10 NLSS would generate a
public chairperson list, and FINRA
would send this list only to the
parties.11
If the lists have been sent to parties
but are not yet due, FINRA would send
two new lists to the parties: A public
chairperson list and a public arbitrator
list as outlined in Rule 13403(b)(2).12
The parties would keep the non-public
chairperson list provided to them as
described in Rule 13403(a), and would
select the non-public arbitrator from this
list. The arbitrator selected from the
public chairperson list would be the
chairperson of the panel. If the panel
consists of one arbitrator, FINRA would
send only a new public chairperson list
to the parties.13
If the ranked lists are due, then the
parties may not amend a pleading to
10 In a dispute between members, if the panel
consists of one arbitrator, the arbitrator will be
selected from FINRA’s non-public chairperson
arbitrator roster. See Rule 13402(a).
11 See Rule 13403(b)(1). FINRA has raised the
amount in controversy that will be heard by a single
chair-qualified arbitrator to $100,000. The rule
became effective on March 30, 2009. See Exchange
Act Release No. 59340 (February 2, 2009), 74 FR
6335 (February 6, 2009) (File No. SR–FINRA–2008–
047); see also Regulatory Notice 09–13.
12 Pursuant to Rule 13407(a), FINRA will send the
list of non-public arbitrators to the new party, with
employment history for the past 10 years and other
background information for each arbitrator listed.
The newly added party may rank and strike
arbitrators in accordance with Rule 13404.
13 See note 8 supra.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:47 Jun 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
add a new party until a panel has been
selected and the panel grants a motion
to add the party.14 If the panel grants the
motion to add an associated person,
FINRA will retain the non-public
chairperson from the panel, and remove
the remaining non-public arbitrators.15
The parties would select two public
arbitrators from new lists that FINRA
would send to them in the same manner
as if the ranked lists are not yet due. The
arbitrator selected from the public
chairperson list would be the
chairperson of the panel. If the panel
consists of one arbitrator and the
arbitrator grants a motion to add an
associated person, the arbitrator would
be replaced with a public chairqualified arbitrator that the parties
select from a new public chairperson
list that NLSS would generate.16
II. Discussion
After careful review, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national
securities association.17 In particular,
the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section
15A(b)(6) of the Act,18 in that it is
designed, among other things, 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.
The Commission believes that the
proposed rule change will protect the
public interest by simplifying the
criteria for panel composition in
industry disputes, establishing an
objective standard for determining panel
composition, and ensuring that panel
composition is determined by the types
of parties involved, and not by the types
of claims filed.
III. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the
Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Act
and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national
securities association.
14 See
Rule 13309(c) of the Industry Code.
to Rule 13407(b), the newly added
party may not strike the non-public arbitrator but
may challenge the arbitrator for cause in accordance
with Rule 13410.
16 See note 8 supra.
17 In approving the proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the rule change’s
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
18 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6).
15 Pursuant
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28319
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,19 that the
proposed rule change (SR–FINRA–
2009–011), as modified by Amendment
No. 1, be and hereby is approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority. 20
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–13967 Filed 6–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 6662]
Notice of Proposed Information
Collection
30–Day Notice of Proposed
Information Collection: Form DS–7002,
Training/Internship Placement Plan,
OMB Control Number 1405–0170.
ACTION: Notice of request for public
comment and submission to OMB of
proposed collection of information.
SUMMARY: The Department of State has
submitted the following information
collection request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
approval in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
* Title of Information Collection:
Training/Internship Placement Plan.
* OMB Control Number: 1405–0170.
* Type of Request: Revision of a
Currently Approved Collection.
* Originating Office: Bureau of
Educational and Cultural Affairs,
ECA/EC.
* Form Number: Form DS–7002.
* Respondents: Entities designated by
the Department of State as sponsors of
exchange visitor programs in the trainee
or intern categories and U.S. businesses
that provide the training or internship
opportunity.
* Estimated Number of Respondents:
160.
* Estimated Number of Responses:
30,000.
* Average Hours per Response: 2
hours.
* Total Estimated Burden: 60,000.
* Frequency: On occasion.
* Obligation To Respond: Required to
obtain a benefit.
DATES: Submit comments to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
up to 30 days from June 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Direct comments and
questions to Katherine Astrich, the
Department of State Desk Officer in the
19 15
20 17
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
15JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 113 (Monday, June 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28318-28319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13967]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-60061; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-011]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change as Modified by
Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend the Panel Composition Rules of the
Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes
June 5, 2009.
On March 4, 2009, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) 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'' or ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend the panel composition
rules of the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes
(``Industry Code''). On April 7, 2009, FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the Federal Register on
May 4, 2009.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the proposed
rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified
by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 59836 (April 28, 2009); 74 FR
20519 (May 4, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Description of the Proposal
FINRA proposed to amend the Industry Code to change the criteria
for determining the panel composition when the claim involves an
associated person in industry disputes.
Currently, Rule 13402(a) of the Industry Code requires an all non-
public panel for disputes between members, and for employment disputes
between or among members and associated persons that relate exclusively
to employment contracts, promissory notes, or receipt of
commissions.\4\ In all other disputes between or among members and
associated persons, Rule 13402(b) requires a majority public panel,
where one arbitrator would be a non-public arbitrator and two would be
public arbitrators.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ If the panel consists of one arbitrator, the arbitrator will
be a non-public arbitrator selected from the non-public chairperson
roster described in Rule 13400(c). See Rule 13402(a).
\5\ If the panel consists of one arbitrator, the arbitrator will
be a public arbitrator selected from the chairperson roster
described in Rule 12400(c) of the Code of Arbitration Procedure for
Customer Disputes (``Customer Code''). See Rule 13402(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA proposed to amend the Industry Code to change the criteria
for determining panel composition when the claim involves an associated
person in industry disputes.\6\ Specifically, FINRA proposed to amend
Rule 13402 and related rules of the Industry Code to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The proposed changes discussed in this order will not apply
to claims filed under the Customer Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Require that the parties receive a majority public panel
for all industry disputes involving associated persons (excluding
disputes involving statutory employment discrimination claims which
require a specialized all public panel); \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The proposal would not apply to disputes involving a claim
of statutory employment discrimination. See Rule 13802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarify that in disputes involving only members, parties
will receive an all non-public panel; and
Provide that if a party amends its pleadings to add an
associated person to a previously all member case, parties will receive
a majority public panel.
Thus, cases involving only members would have an all non-public panel;
cases involving a member and an associated person (excluding cases
involving a claim for statutory discrimination) would have a majority
public panel; and cases involving an associated person with a statutory
discrimination claim would have a specialized all public panel.\8\
Moreover, if a member amends its pleadings to add an associated person,
the case would receive a majority public panel, and the rules that
apply to cases between associated persons and members would govern list
selection and the administration of the arbitration proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Rule 13802(c) (panel composition rule for statutory
employment discrimination claims).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment Disputes Involving Associated Persons
Currently, in employment disputes between or among members and
associated persons, FINRA requires that the panel consist of all non-
public arbitrators in cases that arise out of the employment or
termination of employment of an associated person, and that relate
exclusively to (1) employment contracts, (2) promissory notes, or (3)
receipt of commissions. However, if a party adds a claim that does not
meet these criteria, the parties receive a majority public panel.
FINRA proposed to amend Rule 13402 of the Industry Code to clarify
that for all employment disputes between or among members and
associated persons (except for statutory employment discrimination
cases), the parties must select a majority public panel.\9\ Rule
13402(a) would be amended to delete the title of the rule, which
contains the exceptions to the majority public panel requirement, and
replace it with a concise description, which clarifies that Rule
13402(a) would apply to disputes involving only members. Rule 13402(b)
would be amended to modify the title of the rule to clarify that for
all industry disputes involving associated persons (excluding disputes
involving statutory employment discrimination claims), the parties
would receive a majority public panel. FINRA also proposed to make
similar title changes to Rules 13403(a) and 13403(b), which govern
generating and sending lists to parties, and to Rules 13406(a) and
13406(b), which govern appointment of arbitrators and discretion to
appoint arbitrators not on the list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The proposed change would be consistent with the rules and
procedures of the former New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'')
arbitration forum. In the NYSE arbitration forum, cases involving
associated persons received a majority public panel because the
rules classified associated persons as non-members, and non-members
received a majority public panel. See NYSE Rule 607(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 28319]]
Employment Disputes Involving Only Members
FINRA proposed to amend Rule 13402(a) to clarify that, in disputes
involving only members, the parties will receive an all non-public
panel. FINRA noted that the proposed amendment to Rule 13402(a) is
consistent with the current rule and its intent, which is that disputes
involving only members should receive an all non-public panel.
Amendments to Pleadings That Add an Associated Person
FINRA proposed to add a provision to Rule 13402(a) to address
amended pleadings that add an associated person as a party. Under the
proposed rule change, if a member in a dispute involving only members
amends a pleading to add a party who is an associated person, the
parties will receive a majority public panel. If lists of potential
arbitrators have not been sent to parties, the Neutral List Selection
System (NLSS) would generate three lists as outlined in Rule
13403(b)(2) of the Industry Code. Specifically, FINRA would send a
public chairperson list, a public arbitrator list, and a non-public
arbitrator list. If the panel consists of one arbitrator,\10\ NLSS
would generate a public chairperson list, and FINRA would send this
list only to the parties.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In a dispute between members, if the panel consists of one
arbitrator, the arbitrator will be selected from FINRA's non-public
chairperson arbitrator roster. See Rule 13402(a).
\11\ See Rule 13403(b)(1). FINRA has raised the amount in
controversy that will be heard by a single chair-qualified
arbitrator to $100,000. The rule became effective on March 30, 2009.
See Exchange Act Release No. 59340 (February 2, 2009), 74 FR 6335
(February 6, 2009) (File No. SR-FINRA-2008-047); see also Regulatory
Notice 09-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the lists have been sent to parties but are not yet due, FINRA
would send two new lists to the parties: A public chairperson list and
a public arbitrator list as outlined in Rule 13403(b)(2).\12\ The
parties would keep the non-public chairperson list provided to them as
described in Rule 13403(a), and would select the non-public arbitrator
from this list. The arbitrator selected from the public chairperson
list would be the chairperson of the panel. If the panel consists of
one arbitrator, FINRA would send only a new public chairperson list to
the parties.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Pursuant to Rule 13407(a), FINRA will send the list of non-
public arbitrators to the new party, with employment history for the
past 10 years and other background information for each arbitrator
listed. The newly added party may rank and strike arbitrators in
accordance with Rule 13404.
\13\ See note 8 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the ranked lists are due, then the parties may not amend a
pleading to add a new party until a panel has been selected and the
panel grants a motion to add the party.\14\ If the panel grants the
motion to add an associated person, FINRA will retain the non-public
chairperson from the panel, and remove the remaining non-public
arbitrators.\15\ The parties would select two public arbitrators from
new lists that FINRA would send to them in the same manner as if the
ranked lists are not yet due. The arbitrator selected from the public
chairperson list would be the chairperson of the panel. If the panel
consists of one arbitrator and the arbitrator grants a motion to add an
associated person, the arbitrator would be replaced with a public
chair-qualified arbitrator that the parties select from a new public
chairperson list that NLSS would generate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Rule 13309(c) of the Industry Code.
\15\ Pursuant to Rule 13407(b), the newly added party may not
strike the non-public arbitrator but may challenge the arbitrator
for cause in accordance with Rule 13410.
\16\ See note 8 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion
After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
association.\17\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\18\ in
that it is designed, among other things, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the rule change's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes that the proposed rule change will protect
the public interest by simplifying the criteria for panel composition
in industry disputes, establishing an objective standard for
determining panel composition, and ensuring that panel composition is
determined by the types of parties involved, and not by the types of
claims filed.
III. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities association.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\19\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2009-011), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, be and hereby is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority. \20\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-13967 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P