Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, To Amend Its Minor Rule Violation Plan, 42139-42140 [E9-19892]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 160 / Thursday, August 20, 2009 / Notices
—Member Roundtable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
meeting is open to the public however
advance notice of attendance is
requested. Anyone wishing to be a
listening participant must contact
Alanna Falcone by Friday, September
11, 2009, by fax or e-mail in order to be
placed on the agenda. Alanna Falcone,
Program Analyst, 409 Third Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20416, Phone 202–619–
1612, Fax 202–481–0134, e-mail,
alanna.falcone@sba.gov.
Additionally, if you need
accommodations because of a disability
or require additional information, please
contact Alanna Falcone at the
information above.
Meaghan Burdick,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–19999 Filed 8–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meeting
Federal Register Citation of Previous
Announcement: [74 FR 41466, August
17, 2009].
STATUS:
PLACE:
Closed Meeting.
100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC.
DATE AND TIME OF PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED
MEETING: Thursday, August 20, 2009 at
2 p.m.
Cancellation of
Meeting.
The Closed Meeting scheduled for
Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 2 p.m. has
been cancelled.
For further information please contact
the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551–
5400.
CHANGE IN THE MEETING:
Dated: August 18, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–20099 Filed 8–19–09; 8:45 am]
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Aug 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[File No. 500–1]
42139
By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–20111 Filed 8–18–09; 4:15 pm]
In the Matter of Magnum Resources,
Inc., Manakoa Services Corp. (n/k/a
Teslavision Corp.), Maxus Technology
Corp., Med/Waste, Inc., Medsearch
Technologies, Inc., and Meisenheimer
Capital, Inc.; Order of Suspension of
Trading
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
August 18, 2009.
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, To
Amend Its Minor Rule Violation Plan
It appears to the Securities and
Exchange Commission that there is a
lack of current and accurate information
concerning the securities of Magnum
Resources, Inc. because it has not filed
any periodic reports since the period
ended April 30, 1999.
It appears to the Securities and
Exchange Commission that there is a
lack of current and accurate information
concerning the securities of Manakoa
Services Corp. (n/k/a Teslavision Corp.)
because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended
December 31, 2006.
It appears to the Securities and
Exchange Commission that there is a
lack of current and accurate information
concerning the securities of Maxus
Technology Corp. because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the
period ended November 30, 2004.
It appears to the Securities and
Exchange Commission that there is a
lack of current and accurate information
concerning the securities of Med/Waste,
Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended
September 30, 2000.
It appears to the Securities and
Exchange Commission that there is a
lack of current and accurate information
concerning the securities of Medsearch
Technologies, Inc. because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 2001.
It appears to the Securities and
Exchange Commission that there is a
lack of current and accurate information
concerning the securities of
Meisenheimer Capital, Inc. because it
has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended February 29, 2004.
The Commission is of the opinion that
the public interest and the protection of
investors require a suspension of trading
in the securities of the above-listed
companies.
Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to
Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, that trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies
is suspended for the period from 9:30
a.m. EDT on August 18, 2009, through
11:59 p.m. EDT on August 31, 2009.
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–60488; File No. SR–CBOE–
2009–037]
August 12, 2009.
On June 4, 2009, the Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated
(‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) 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
amending CBOE Rule 17.50 (Minor Rule
Plan) (‘‘MRP’’) to incorporate additional
violations into the MRP, increase the
sanctions for certain violations, to make
other minor changes, and to make
changes to the trading and decorum
violations. On June 17, 2009, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change to make nonsubstantive, technical edits to the rule
text submitted as Exhibit 5 to SR–
CBOE–2009–037. On June 23, 2009, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the
proposed rule change making
corrections to the description of the
changes submitted in Amendment No.
1. The proposed rule change, as
amended, was published for comment
in the Federal Register on July 6, 2009.3
The Commission received no comments
on the proposal. This order approves the
proposed rule change.
The Exchange has proposed to make
additional rules subject to punishment
under its the MRP. These rules relate to:
(1) Exercise limits (Rule 4.12); (2)
trading in restricted classes (Rule 5.4);
(3) linkage violations (Rules 6.83 and
6.84); (4) market maker quoting
obligations (Rules 8.7, 8.15A, 8.85, and
8.93); (5) failure to accurately report
position and account information (Rule
4.13); (6) failure to designate a person or
persons responsible for implementing
and monitoring a member’s anti-money
laundering compliance program (Rule
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60177
(June 25, 2009), 74 FR 32015.
2 17
E:\FR\FM\20AUN1.SGM
20AUN1
42140
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 160 / Thursday, August 20, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
4.20); (7) failure to provide prior capital
withdrawal notice (Rule 15c3–1(e)
under the Act); and (8) failure to
provide post capital withdrawal notice
(Rule 15c3–1(e) under the Act). The
Exchange believes that it will be able to
carry out its regulatory responsibility
more quickly and efficiently by
incorporating these violations into its
MRP.
The Exchange has also proposed to
increase the fine levels for certain
violations.4 The Exchange believes that
the current fine levels for such
violations are too low, given the serious
nature of such offenses, and that the
proposed increases are necessary to be
an effective deterrent against future
violations and a just penalty for such
violations. Furthermore, the Exchange
has proposed to extend the surveillance
period for many of the violations to a
24-month rolling period from a 12month period.5 The Exchange believes
that increasing the surveillance period
will serve as an effective deterrent to
future violative conduct. The Exchange
also proposed a few other technical
corrections to its MRP.
The Exchange proposed to establish a
rolling 24-month look-back period for
all of their trading and decorum
violation offenses. In addition, the
4 The proposed increased fines would apply to
the following violations: (1) Failure to respond in
a timely manner to a request for automated
submission of trade data (‘‘Blue Sheets’’) (Rule
15.7); (2) failure of a floor broker or market maker
to honor the firm quote requirements (Rule 8.51),
to honor the priority of marketable customer orders
maintained in the Customer Limit Order Book (Rule
6.45), and to use due diligence in the execution of
orders for which the floor member maintains an
agency obligation (Rule 6.73); and (3) violations of
exercise and exercise advice rules for Americanstyle, cash-settled index options (Rule 11.1,
Interpretation and Policy .03).
5 The violations that will have a 24-month rolling
period are: (1) Violation of exercise and position
limits (Rule 4.11 and 4.12); (2) failure to respond
in a timely manner to a request for automated
submission of trade data (‘‘Blue Sheets’’) (Rule
15.7); (3) failure of a floor broker or market maker
to honor the firm quote requirements (Rule 8.51),
to honor the priority of marketable customer orders
maintained in the Customer Limit Order Book (Rule
6.45), and to use due diligence in the execution of
orders for which the floor member maintains an
agency obligation (Rule 6.73); (4) failure to submit
trade data on trade date (Rule 6.51); (5) violations
of exercise and exercise advice rules for Americanstyle, cash-settled index options (Rule 11.1,
Interpretation and Policy .03); (6) communications
to the Exchange or the clearing corporation (Rule
4.22); (7) trading in restricted classes (Rule 5.4); (8)
linkage violations (Rules 6.83 and 6.84); (9) failure
to meet Exchange quoting obligations (Rules 8.7,
8.15A, 8.85, and 8.93); (10) failure to accurately
report position and account information (Rule 4.13);
(11) failure to provide prior capital withdrawal
notice (Rule 15c3–1(e) under the Act); (12) failure
to provide post capital withdrawal notice (Rule
15c3–1(e) under the Act); and (13) failure to
designate a person or persons responsible for
implementing and monitoring a member’s antimoney laundering compliance program (Rule 4.20).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Aug 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
Exchange proposed to establish fixed
fine levels for Class A and Class B
Offenses.6 For Class A Offenses, CBOE
will now assess a fine of $1,000 for the
first violation, $2,500 for the second
violation, and $5,000 for the third
violation. The Exchange is also
proposing to delete the reference to
‘‘Subsequent Offenses’’ for Class A
Offenses.7 For Class B Offenses, CBOE
is proposing to assess a fine of $250 for
the first offense, $500 for the second
offense, $1,000 for the third offense, and
$2,500 for any subsequent offenses.8
The Exchange proposes to change the
classification of a market maker failing
to respond to a request for a market by
an Order Book Official or a PAR Official
from a Class B Offense to a Class A
Offense due to the nature of this
violation. The Exchange is also
proposing to remove obsolete or
duplicative violations from the list of
Class A and Class B Offenses.9
The Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to
a national securities exchange.10 In
particular, the Commission believes that
the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,11 which requires that
the rules of an exchange be designed to,
among other things, protect investors
and the public interest. The
Commission also believes that the
proposal is consistent with Sections
6(b)(1) and 6(b)(6) of the Act,12 which
require that the rules of an exchange
enforce compliance with, and provide
appropriate discipline for, violations of
6 Class A Offenses are considered more serious
than Class B Offenses and therefore carry a heavier
penalty. Class A Offenses include unbusinesslike
conduct, harassment, and property damage. Class B
Offenses include abusive language, dress code
violations, and failure to display I.D.
7 The previous fine levels for Class A Offenses
were: $500 to $1,500 for the first violation, $1,000
to $3,000 for the second violation, $2,000 to $5,000
for the third violation, and $3,500 to $5,000 for
subsequent offenses.
8 The previous fine levels for Class B Offenses
were: $100 to $500 for the first offense, $500 to
$1,000 for the second offense, $1,000 for the third
offense, and $2,500 for subsequent offenses.
9 The Exchange is proposing to remove ten Class
A and Class B Violations. They are: (i) Quote width
violations; (ii) violations of Rule 8.51 (Firm Quote);
(iii) enabling/assisting a suspended member or
associated person to gain improper access to the
floor; (iv) gaining/enabling improper access to the
floor; (v) effecting or attempting to effect a
transaction with no public outcry; (vi) improper use
of the runners’ aisle; (vii) trading in the aisle; (viii)
impermissible use of member phones; (ix) returning
late or failing to return a visitor badge; and (x) DPM
failure to activate or deactivate RAES.
10 In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission notes that it has considered the
proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and 78f(b)(6).
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Commission and Exchange rules.
Furthermore, the Commission believes
that the proposed changes to the MRP
should strengthen the Exchange’s ability
to carry out its oversight and
enforcement responsibilities as a selfregulatory organization in cases where
full disciplinary proceedings are
unsuitable in view of the minor nature
of the particular violation. Therefore,
the Commission finds that the proposal
is consistent with the public interest,
the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act, as required by Rule 19d–1(c)(2)
under the Act,13 which governs minor
rule violation plans.
In approving this proposed rule
change, the Commission in no way
minimizes the importance of
compliance with CBOE rules and all
other rules subject to the imposition of
fines under the MRP. The Commission
believes that the violation of any selfregulatory organization’s rules, as well
as Commission rules, is a serious matter.
However, the MRP provides a
reasonable means of addressing rule
violations that do not rise to the level of
requiring formal disciplinary
proceedings, while providing greater
flexibility in handling certain violations.
The Commission expects that CBOE will
continue to conduct surveillance with
due diligence and make a determination
based on its findings, on a case-by-case
basis, whether a fine of more or less
than the recommended amount is
appropriate for a violation under the
MRP or whether a violation requires
formal disciplinary action under CBOE
Rules 17.1–17.14.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 14 and Rule
19d–1(c)(2) under the Act,15 that the
proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2009–
037), as amended, be, and hereby is,
approved and declared effective.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.16
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–19892 Filed 8–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
13 17
CFR 240.19d–1(c)(2).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
15 17 CFR 240.19d–1(c)(2).
16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30–
3(a)(44).
14 15
E:\FR\FM\20AUN1.SGM
20AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 160 (Thursday, August 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42139-42140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19892]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-60488; File No. SR-CBOE-2009-037]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, To Amend Its Minor Rule Violation Plan
August 12, 2009.
On June 4, 2009, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') 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 amending CBOE Rule 17.50 (Minor
Rule Plan) (``MRP'') to incorporate additional violations into the MRP,
increase the sanctions for certain violations, to make other minor
changes, and to make changes to the trading and decorum violations. On
June 17, 2009, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change to make non-substantive, technical edits to the rule text
submitted as Exhibit 5 to SR-CBOE-2009-037. On June 23, 2009, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change making
corrections to the description of the changes submitted in Amendment
No. 1. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment
in the Federal Register on July 6, 2009.\3\ The Commission received no
comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60177 (June 25, 2009),
74 FR 32015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange has proposed to make additional rules subject to
punishment under its the MRP. These rules relate to: (1) Exercise
limits (Rule 4.12); (2) trading in restricted classes (Rule 5.4); (3)
linkage violations (Rules 6.83 and 6.84); (4) market maker quoting
obligations (Rules 8.7, 8.15A, 8.85, and 8.93); (5) failure to
accurately report position and account information (Rule 4.13); (6)
failure to designate a person or persons responsible for implementing
and monitoring a member's anti-money laundering compliance program
(Rule
[[Page 42140]]
4.20); (7) failure to provide prior capital withdrawal notice (Rule
15c3-1(e) under the Act); and (8) failure to provide post capital
withdrawal notice (Rule 15c3-1(e) under the Act). The Exchange believes
that it will be able to carry out its regulatory responsibility more
quickly and efficiently by incorporating these violations into its MRP.
The Exchange has also proposed to increase the fine levels for
certain violations.\4\ The Exchange believes that the current fine
levels for such violations are too low, given the serious nature of
such offenses, and that the proposed increases are necessary to be an
effective deterrent against future violations and a just penalty for
such violations. Furthermore, the Exchange has proposed to extend the
surveillance period for many of the violations to a 24-month rolling
period from a 12-month period.\5\ The Exchange believes that increasing
the surveillance period will serve as an effective deterrent to future
violative conduct. The Exchange also proposed a few other technical
corrections to its MRP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The proposed increased fines would apply to the following
violations: (1) Failure to respond in a timely manner to a request
for automated submission of trade data (``Blue Sheets'') (Rule
15.7); (2) failure of a floor broker or market maker to honor the
firm quote requirements (Rule 8.51), to honor the priority of
marketable customer orders maintained in the Customer Limit Order
Book (Rule 6.45), and to use due diligence in the execution of
orders for which the floor member maintains an agency obligation
(Rule 6.73); and (3) violations of exercise and exercise advice
rules for American-style, cash-settled index options (Rule 11.1,
Interpretation and Policy .03).
\5\ The violations that will have a 24-month rolling period are:
(1) Violation of exercise and position limits (Rule 4.11 and 4.12);
(2) failure to respond in a timely manner to a request for automated
submission of trade data (``Blue Sheets'') (Rule 15.7); (3) failure
of a floor broker or market maker to honor the firm quote
requirements (Rule 8.51), to honor the priority of marketable
customer orders maintained in the Customer Limit Order Book (Rule
6.45), and to use due diligence in the execution of orders for which
the floor member maintains an agency obligation (Rule 6.73); (4)
failure to submit trade data on trade date (Rule 6.51); (5)
violations of exercise and exercise advice rules for American-style,
cash-settled index options (Rule 11.1, Interpretation and Policy
.03); (6) communications to the Exchange or the clearing corporation
(Rule 4.22); (7) trading in restricted classes (Rule 5.4); (8)
linkage violations (Rules 6.83 and 6.84); (9) failure to meet
Exchange quoting obligations (Rules 8.7, 8.15A, 8.85, and 8.93);
(10) failure to accurately report position and account information
(Rule 4.13); (11) failure to provide prior capital withdrawal notice
(Rule 15c3-1(e) under the Act); (12) failure to provide post capital
withdrawal notice (Rule 15c3-1(e) under the Act); and (13) failure
to designate a person or persons responsible for implementing and
monitoring a member's anti-money laundering compliance program (Rule
4.20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposed to establish a rolling 24-month look-back
period for all of their trading and decorum violation offenses. In
addition, the Exchange proposed to establish fixed fine levels for
Class A and Class B Offenses.\6\ For Class A Offenses, CBOE will now
assess a fine of $1,000 for the first violation, $2,500 for the second
violation, and $5,000 for the third violation. The Exchange is also
proposing to delete the reference to ``Subsequent Offenses'' for Class
A Offenses.\7\ For Class B Offenses, CBOE is proposing to assess a fine
of $250 for the first offense, $500 for the second offense, $1,000 for
the third offense, and $2,500 for any subsequent offenses.\8\ The
Exchange proposes to change the classification of a market maker
failing to respond to a request for a market by an Order Book Official
or a PAR Official from a Class B Offense to a Class A Offense due to
the nature of this violation. The Exchange is also proposing to remove
obsolete or duplicative violations from the list of Class A and Class B
Offenses.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Class A Offenses are considered more serious than Class B
Offenses and therefore carry a heavier penalty. Class A Offenses
include unbusinesslike conduct, harassment, and property damage.
Class B Offenses include abusive language, dress code violations,
and failure to display I.D.
\7\ The previous fine levels for Class A Offenses were: $500 to
$1,500 for the first violation, $1,000 to $3,000 for the second
violation, $2,000 to $5,000 for the third violation, and $3,500 to
$5,000 for subsequent offenses.
\8\ The previous fine levels for Class B Offenses were: $100 to
$500 for the first offense, $500 to $1,000 for the second offense,
$1,000 for the third offense, and $2,500 for subsequent offenses.
\9\ The Exchange is proposing to remove ten Class A and Class B
Violations. They are: (i) Quote width violations; (ii) violations of
Rule 8.51 (Firm Quote); (iii) enabling/assisting a suspended member
or associated person to gain improper access to the floor; (iv)
gaining/enabling improper access to the floor; (v) effecting or
attempting to effect a transaction with no public outcry; (vi)
improper use of the runners' aisle; (vii) trading in the aisle;
(viii) impermissible use of member phones; (ix) returning late or
failing to return a visitor badge; and (x) DPM failure to activate
or deactivate RAES.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\10\ In particular, the
Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which requires that the rules of an exchange be
designed to, among other things, protect investors and the public
interest. The Commission also believes that the proposal is consistent
with Sections 6(b)(1) and 6(b)(6) of the Act,\12\ which require that
the rules of an exchange enforce compliance with, and provide
appropriate discipline for, violations of Commission and Exchange
rules. Furthermore, the Commission believes that the proposed changes
to the MRP should strengthen the Exchange's ability to carry out its
oversight and enforcement responsibilities as a self-regulatory
organization in cases where full disciplinary proceedings are
unsuitable in view of the minor nature of the particular violation.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
the public interest, the protection of investors, or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as required by Rule 19d-1(c)(2)
under the Act,\13\ which governs minor rule violation plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and 78f(b)(6).
\13\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission in no way
minimizes the importance of compliance with CBOE rules and all other
rules subject to the imposition of fines under the MRP. The Commission
believes that the violation of any self-regulatory organization's
rules, as well as Commission rules, is a serious matter. However, the
MRP provides a reasonable means of addressing rule violations that do
not rise to the level of requiring formal disciplinary proceedings,
while providing greater flexibility in handling certain violations. The
Commission expects that CBOE will continue to conduct surveillance with
due diligence and make a determination based on its findings, on a
case-by-case basis, whether a fine of more or less than the recommended
amount is appropriate for a violation under the MRP or whether a
violation requires formal disciplinary action under CBOE Rules 17.1-
17.14.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\14\ and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act,\15\ that the proposed rule
change (SR-CBOE-2009-037), as amended, be, and hereby is, approved and
declared effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\15\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).
\16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(44).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19892 Filed 8-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P