Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Related to the Exchange's Complex Order Execution Mechanisms, 59470-59472 [2011-24594]
Download as PDF
59470
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.63
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–24607 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–65360; File No. SR–C2–
2011–022]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2
Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Related to the Exchange’s
Complex Order Execution Mechanisms
September 20, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on
September 16, 2011, the C2 Options
Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘Exchange’’ or
‘‘C2’’) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the
‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared
by the Exchange. The Exchange has
designated the proposal as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of
the Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)
thereunder.4 The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend C2
Rules [sic] 6.13, Complex Order
Execution. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange’s
Web site (https://www.c2exchange.com/
Legal/RuleFilings.aspx), at the
Exchange’s Office of the Secretary and
at the Commission.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
17:37 Sep 23, 2011
1. Purpose
C2 Rule 6.13 governs the operation of
the Exchange’s electronic complex order
book and electronic complex order
auction (referred to as ‘‘COB’’ and
‘‘COA,’’ respectively). The purpose of
this proposed rule change is to
incorporate a provision that would
provide the Exchange with the ability to
determine which electronic allocation
algorithm shall apply for COB and/or
COA executions on a class-by-class
basis, subject to certain conditions.
Currently, as described in more detail
below, the allocation algorithms for
COB and COA default to the allocation
algorithms in effect for a given options
class. As proposed, the rule change
would provide the Exchange with the
flexibility to permit the allocation
algorithm in effect for COB/COA to be
different from the default allocation
algorithm in effect for the options class.
The applicable algorithm for COB/COA
would be selected from among the
allocation algorithms set forth in Rule
6.12, Order Execution and Priority.5
Specifically, the Exchange is
proposing as follows:
• COB: Currently, Rule 6.13(b)(1)(A)
through (B) provides that, at the same
net price, individual series component
legs have priority over complex orders
resting in the COB when executing
against a complex order. If there are
multiple complex orders resting in COB
at the same price, the allocation of a
complex order within COB is pursuant
to the rules of trading priority otherwise
applicable to incoming electronic orders
in the individual component legs. The
Exchange is proposing to amend Rule
6.13(b)(1)(B) to have the flexibility to
determine to apply a different allocation
algorithm for complex orders resting in
COB. Such algorithm would be selected
from among the algorithms set forth in
Rule 6.12. (At the same price, the
individual series legs will continue to
5 The allocation algorithms include price-time
priority, pro-rata priority, and price-time with
primary public customer and secondary trade
participation right priority. Each of these base
allocation methodologies can be supplemented with
an optional market turner priority overlay. See Rule
6.12(a) through (b).
63 17
VerDate Mar<15>2010
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant parts of such
statements.
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
have priority over complex orders
resting in COB regardless of the
allocation algorithm that is chosen for
complex orders resting in COB.)
• COA: Currently, Rule 6.13(c)(5)(A)
through (D) provides that, at the same
place [sic], individual series component
legs have priority over complex orders
resting in COB and COA responses
when executing against an incoming
COA-eligible order. To the extent there
are multiple complex orders and
responses at the same price, Rule
6.13(c)(5)(B) through (D) specifies that,
at the same price, the allocation is based
on public customer complex orders and
responses having priority (with multiple
public customer complex orders and
responses being allocated based on time
priority), then non-public customer
complex orders resting in COB before
the COA auction response time interval
(with multiple non-public customer
complex orders being allocated based on
the allocation algorithm in effect for the
individual component legs), then nonpublic customer complex orders resting
in COB and responses received during
the COA auction response time interval
(with such multiple non-public
customer complex orders and responses
being allocated based on the allocation
algorithm in effect for the individual
component legs). The Exchange is
proposing to amend the rule to have the
flexibility to determine to apply a
different allocation algorithm from the
one set out in Rule 6.13(c)(5)(B) through
(D) for complex orders and responses
that trade against a COA-eligible order.
Such algorithm would be selected from
among the algorithms set forth in Rule
6.12, which may or may not include
public customer priority. (At the same
price, the individual series legs will
continue to have priority over complex
orders in COB and COA responses
regardless of the allocation algorithm
that is chosen for complex orders in
COB and COA responses.) All
pronouncements regarding allocation
algorithm determinations by the
Exchange will be announced to C2
Trading Permit Holders via Regulatory
Circular.
As noted above, the allocation
algorithm applied to COB/COA for each
options class will be selected from
among those set forth in Rule 6.12.
Thus, the Exchange is not creating any
new algorithms for the mechanisms, but
is amending Rules [sic] 6.13 to provide
the flexibility to choose an algorithm
from among the existing algorithms to
be applied to the COB/COA
mechanisms rather than simply
defaulting to the algorithm in effect for
intra-day trading in an options class
(e.g., the algorithm for intra-day trading
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Notices
may be established as pro-rata priority
without public customer priority, while
the algorithm for complex orders in
COB and COA may be established as
price-time priority (with or without
public customer priority)). Regardless of
the algorithm selected for complex order
in COB or COA responses, the
individual series legs retain priority
over complex orders. All other aspects
of COB/COA pursuant to Rules [sic]
6.13 shall apply unchanged. The
Exchange believes that having this
additional flexibility will allow the
Exchange to select an allocation
algorithm (from among the existing
algorithms set forth in Rule 6.12) that
the Exchange believes is appropriate
considering the particular options class
and mechanism. With respect to COA,
the Exchange believes that having the
ability to select an alternate algorithm
will provide us with additional
flexibility to incent market participants
to respond to COA auctions.
The second purpose of the proposed
rule change is to make a correction to
the text of Rule 6.13 pertaining to
complex orders. In particular, the
Exchange is proposing to change the
maximum permissible ratio for complex
orders in COB, which is currently
incorrectly identified as a ratio of oneto-two or lower, to a ratio of one-to-three
or lower. As revised, this Rule 6.13
provision will conform the rule text
with the definition of a ratio order in
subparagraph (d)(5) of C2 Rule 6.10,
Order Types Defined.6 We also note that
the change to a maximum ratio of oneto-three is consistent with the electronic
complex order book rules of other
options exchanges.7
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2. Statutory Basis
The basis under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’) for
this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) 8 that
an exchange have rules that are
designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism for a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest. In particular, the
6 Rule 6.10(d)(5) currently provides that a
permissible ratio for a ratio order is any ratio that
is equal to greater than one-to-three (.333) and less
than or equal to three-to-one (3.00). The Exchange
notes that Rule 6.10(d)(5) was amended as part of
the C2 Form-1 application to become a national
securities exchange in order to reflect this
maximum one-to-three ratio. See Amendment 1 to
C2 Form-1 Application, December 4, 2009. We are
now seeking to conform the text of Rule 6.13.
7 See, e.g., Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’) Rule 6.53C(c)(iii).
8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:37 Sep 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
Exchange believes the proposed change
is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism for a free and open market
and national market system because the
rule change would provide more
flexibility for the Exchange to designate
the allocation algorithm for COB and/or
COA in a manner that is consistent with
existing C2 rules. The Exchange also
believes that correcting the text of Rule
6.13 to reflect the maximum ratio for
complex orders in COB of one-to-three
will provide additional clarity, avoid
confusion and conform the rule text to
be consistent with C2 Rule 6.10(d)(5)
and the electronic complex order book
rules of other options exchanges.9
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor
received comments on the proposal.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Because the foregoing rule does not (i)
Significantly affect the protection of
investors or the public interest; (ii)
impose any significant burden on
competition; and (iii) become operative
for 30 days from the date on which it
was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent
with the protection of investors and the
public interest, provided that the selfregulatory organization has given the
Commission written notice of its intent
to file the proposed rule change at least
five business days prior to the date of
filing of the proposed rule change or
such shorter time as designated by the
Commission, the proposed rule change
has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.11 At any
time within 60 days of the filing of such
proposed rule change, the Commission
summarily may temporarily suspend
9 See note 3, [sic] supra, and surrounding
discussion.
10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). C2 has requested that
the Commission waive the five-day pre-filing notice
requirement in Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii). The
Commission waives the five-day pre-filing notice
requirement.
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
59471
such rule change if it appears to the
Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors,
or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–C2–2011–022 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–C2–2011–022. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail 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 Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). 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 Web site 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 the
Exchange. All comments received will
be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–C2–
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
59472
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Notices
2011–022 and should be submitted on
or before October 17, 2011.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.12
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–24594 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–65361; File No. SR–ISE–
2011–42]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
International Securities Exchange, Inc.,
Order Granting Approval of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Rule 717
September 20, 2011.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Introduction
On July 25, 2011, the International
Securities Exchange, LLC (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or the ‘‘ISE’’) 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
codify an existing policy related to the
application of ISE Rules 717(d) and (e).
The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on August 8, 2011.3 The
Commission received no comments
regarding the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change.
II. Description of Proposal
ISE Rules 717(d) and (e) require
members to expose orders entered on
the limit order book for at least one
second before executing them as
principal or against orders that were
solicited from other broker-dealers. This
requirement gives other market
participants an opportunity to
participate in the execution of orders
before the entering member executes
them. In its enforcement of ISE Rules
717(d) and (e), the Exchange has not
considered the inadvertent interaction
of orders from the same firm within one
second to be a violation of the exposure
requirement. The Exchange currently
has a policy that member firms may
demonstrate that orders were entered by
individuals or systems that did not have
the ability to know of the pre-existing
order on the limit order book due to the
12 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34–
65011 (August 2, 2011), 76 FR 48187.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:37 Sep 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
operation of effective information
barriers in place at the time the orders
were entered. This proposed rule
change codifies this policy in
Supplementary Material .06 to Rule 717.
The proposed rule change will require
that such information barriers be fully
documented and provided to the
Exchange upon request.4
III. Discussion and Commission
Findings
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
exchange and, in particular, the
requirements of Section 6 of the Act.5
The Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act,6 which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with
respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, 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 are
not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.7
ISE Rules 717(d) and (e) require
members to expose orders entered on
the limit order book for at least one
second before executing them as
principal or against orders that were
solicited from other broker-dealers. This
requirement gives other market
participants an opportunity to
participate in the execution of orders
before the entering member executes
them. The Exchange represented that it
conducts routine surveillance to
identify instances when an order on the
limit order book is executed against an
order entered by the same firm within
4 The Exchange reviews information barrier
documentation to evaluate whether a member has
implemented processes that are reasonably
designed to prevent the flow of pre-trade order
information given the particular structure of the
member firm. Additionally, information barriers are
reviewed as part of the Exchange’s examination
program, which is administered by the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (‘‘FINRA’’) pursuant
to a regulatory services agreement.
5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
7 In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule’s
impact on efficiency, competition and capital
formation.
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
one second. The Exchange represented
that when it investigates potential
violations of ISE Rules 717(d) and (e), it
considers whether such executions
during the one second exposure period
were entered by persons, business units
and/or systems at the same firm, and
whether the firm has knowledge of preexisting orders on the limit order book.
Further, the Exchange indicated that it
does not consider inadvertent
interaction of such orders from the same
firm during the one second exposure
period to be a rule violation. This
proposal codifies this policy by adding
Supplementary Material .06 to Rule 717
to allow members to provide evidence
of effective information barriers between
the persons, business units and/or
systems at the time of order entry to
indicate that there was no knowledge of
other pre-existing orders entered by the
firm.
The Commission believes that this
proposed rule change should clarify the
intent and application of ISE Rules
717(d) and (e). In addition, the proposed
rule change should enable Exchange to
administer the rule more efficiently by
helping to assure that member firms are
adhering to the same standards for
compliance with ISE Rules 717(d) and
(e). The Commission therefore believes
that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.8
IV. Conclusion
It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,9 that the
proposed rule change (SR–ISE–2011–
42), be, and hereby is, approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.10
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–24593 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–65353; File No. SR–BATS–
2011–035]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS
Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend and
Restate the Amended and Restated
Bylaws of BATS Global Markets, Inc.
September 19, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
8 15
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
10 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
9 15
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 186 (Monday, September 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59470-59472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24594]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-65360; File No. SR-C2-2011-022]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Related to the Exchange's Complex Order Execution Mechanisms
September 20, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on September 16, 2011, the C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``C2'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Exchange has designated the proposal as a ``non-
controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
\4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend C2 Rules [sic] 6.13, Complex Order
Execution. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (https://www.c2exchange.com/Legal/RuleFilings.aspx),
at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary and at the Commission.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
C2 Rule 6.13 governs the operation of the Exchange's electronic
complex order book and electronic complex order auction (referred to as
``COB'' and ``COA,'' respectively). The purpose of this proposed rule
change is to incorporate a provision that would provide the Exchange
with the ability to determine which electronic allocation algorithm
shall apply for COB and/or COA executions on a class-by-class basis,
subject to certain conditions. Currently, as described in more detail
below, the allocation algorithms for COB and COA default to the
allocation algorithms in effect for a given options class. As proposed,
the rule change would provide the Exchange with the flexibility to
permit the allocation algorithm in effect for COB/COA to be different
from the default allocation algorithm in effect for the options class.
The applicable algorithm for COB/COA would be selected from among the
allocation algorithms set forth in Rule 6.12, Order Execution and
Priority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The allocation algorithms include price-time priority, pro-
rata priority, and price-time with primary public customer and
secondary trade participation right priority. Each of these base
allocation methodologies can be supplemented with an optional market
turner priority overlay. See Rule 6.12(a) through (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing as follows:
COB: Currently, Rule 6.13(b)(1)(A) through (B) provides
that, at the same net price, individual series component legs have
priority over complex orders resting in the COB when executing against
a complex order. If there are multiple complex orders resting in COB at
the same price, the allocation of a complex order within COB is
pursuant to the rules of trading priority otherwise applicable to
incoming electronic orders in the individual component legs. The
Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 6.13(b)(1)(B) to have the
flexibility to determine to apply a different allocation algorithm for
complex orders resting in COB. Such algorithm would be selected from
among the algorithms set forth in Rule 6.12. (At the same price, the
individual series legs will continue to have priority over complex
orders resting in COB regardless of the allocation algorithm that is
chosen for complex orders resting in COB.)
COA: Currently, Rule 6.13(c)(5)(A) through (D) provides
that, at the same place [sic], individual series component legs have
priority over complex orders resting in COB and COA responses when
executing against an incoming COA-eligible order. To the extent there
are multiple complex orders and responses at the same price, Rule
6.13(c)(5)(B) through (D) specifies that, at the same price, the
allocation is based on public customer complex orders and responses
having priority (with multiple public customer complex orders and
responses being allocated based on time priority), then non-public
customer complex orders resting in COB before the COA auction response
time interval (with multiple non-public customer complex orders being
allocated based on the allocation algorithm in effect for the
individual component legs), then non-public customer complex orders
resting in COB and responses received during the COA auction response
time interval (with such multiple non-public customer complex orders
and responses being allocated based on the allocation algorithm in
effect for the individual component legs). The Exchange is proposing to
amend the rule to have the flexibility to determine to apply a
different allocation algorithm from the one set out in Rule
6.13(c)(5)(B) through (D) for complex orders and responses that trade
against a COA-eligible order. Such algorithm would be selected from
among the algorithms set forth in Rule 6.12, which may or may not
include public customer priority. (At the same price, the individual
series legs will continue to have priority over complex orders in COB
and COA responses regardless of the allocation algorithm that is chosen
for complex orders in COB and COA responses.) All pronouncements
regarding allocation algorithm determinations by the Exchange will be
announced to C2 Trading Permit Holders via Regulatory Circular.
As noted above, the allocation algorithm applied to COB/COA for
each options class will be selected from among those set forth in Rule
6.12. Thus, the Exchange is not creating any new algorithms for the
mechanisms, but is amending Rules [sic] 6.13 to provide the flexibility
to choose an algorithm from among the existing algorithms to be applied
to the COB/COA mechanisms rather than simply defaulting to the
algorithm in effect for intra-day trading in an options class (e.g.,
the algorithm for intra-day trading
[[Page 59471]]
may be established as pro-rata priority without public customer
priority, while the algorithm for complex orders in COB and COA may be
established as price-time priority (with or without public customer
priority)). Regardless of the algorithm selected for complex order in
COB or COA responses, the individual series legs retain priority over
complex orders. All other aspects of COB/COA pursuant to Rules [sic]
6.13 shall apply unchanged. The Exchange believes that having this
additional flexibility will allow the Exchange to select an allocation
algorithm (from among the existing algorithms set forth in Rule 6.12)
that the Exchange believes is appropriate considering the particular
options class and mechanism. With respect to COA, the Exchange believes
that having the ability to select an alternate algorithm will provide
us with additional flexibility to incent market participants to respond
to COA auctions.
The second purpose of the proposed rule change is to make a
correction to the text of Rule 6.13 pertaining to complex orders. In
particular, the Exchange is proposing to change the maximum permissible
ratio for complex orders in COB, which is currently incorrectly
identified as a ratio of one-to-two or lower, to a ratio of one-to-
three or lower. As revised, this Rule 6.13 provision will conform the
rule text with the definition of a ratio order in subparagraph (d)(5)
of C2 Rule 6.10, Order Types Defined.\6\ We also note that the change
to a maximum ratio of one-to-three is consistent with the electronic
complex order book rules of other options exchanges.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Rule 6.10(d)(5) currently provides that a permissible ratio
for a ratio order is any ratio that is equal to greater than one-to-
three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one (3.00). The
Exchange notes that Rule 6.10(d)(5) was amended as part of the C2
Form-1 application to become a national securities exchange in order
to reflect this maximum one-to-three ratio. See Amendment 1 to C2
Form-1 Application, December 4, 2009. We are now seeking to conform
the text of Rule 6.13.
\7\ See, e.g., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'') Rule 6.53C(c)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The basis under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'')
for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section 6(b)(5)
\8\ that an exchange have rules that are designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. In
particular, the Exchange believes the proposed change is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and
national market system because the rule change would provide more
flexibility for the Exchange to designate the allocation algorithm for
COB and/or COA in a manner that is consistent with existing C2 rules.
The Exchange also believes that correcting the text of Rule 6.13 to
reflect the maximum ratio for complex orders in COB of one-to-three
will provide additional clarity, avoid confusion and conform the rule
text to be consistent with C2 Rule 6.10(d)(5) and the electronic
complex order book rules of other options exchanges.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\9\ See note 3, [sic] supra, and surrounding discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposal.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Because the foregoing rule does not (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, provided that the self-regulatory organization
has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the
proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of
filing of the proposed rule change or such shorter time as designated
by the Commission, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\11\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of such
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). C2 has requested that the
Commission waive the five-day pre-filing notice requirement in Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii). The Commission waives the five-day pre-filing
notice requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-C2-2011-022 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2011-022. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). 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 Web site
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 the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-
[[Page 59472]]
2011-022 and should be submitted on or before October 17, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-24594 Filed 9-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P