Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Obvious Error, 69162-69164 [2013-27472]

Download as PDF 69162 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 222 / Monday, November 18, 2013 / Notices For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.17 Kevin M. O’Neill, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2013–27470 Filed 11–15–13; 8:45 am] the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–70846; File No. SR–C2– 2013–038] Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Obvious Error November 12, 2013. 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 October 28, 2013, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘C2’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 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 Rule 6.15 (Obvious Error and Catastrophic Errors). The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange’s Web site (http:// www.c2exchange.com/Legal/), at the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission’s Public Reference Room. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD 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 any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these 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 17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 1 15 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:33 Nov 15, 2013 Jkt 232001 1. Purpose Exchange Rule 6.15 (Obvious Error and Catastrophic Errors) governs the nullification and adjustment of options transactions. The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 6.15(b)(2) to modify how the Exchange will nullify or adjust an obvious error. The Exchange believes this proposal will also harmonize its rules to more closely align with other options exchanges.3 Under the current rule 6.15(b)(2)(A), the Exchange will adjust the price of an erroneous transaction to the Theoretical Price when the transaction is between two market-makers unless such parties agree to adjust the transaction to a different price or bust the trade within ten minutes of being notified by the Help Desk of the error. Pursuant to current Exchange Rule 6.15(b)(2)(B), transactions involving at least one nonC2 market-maker will be nullified unless both parties agree to adjust the transaction within thirty minutes of being notified by the Help Desk of the error. The Exchange is now proposing to amend Rule 6.15(b)(2) to modify the Exchange obvious error procedures by nullifying trades for transactions involving at least one non-broker-dealer customer and adjusting all other trades between groups that do not fall into this category including for example, a market maker or a broker-dealer.4 The Exchange believes that the proposal will protect investors by eliminating some uncertainty in the current rule. More specifically, the Exchange is first proposing to include all transactions in which neither party is a non-broker-dealer customer in the current Rule 6.15(b)(2)(A) instead of only including transactions between C2 market-makers. Next, the Exchange is proposing to add a provision to nullify all erroneous transactions between nonbroker-dealer customers unless both parties agree to an adjusted price within thirty minutes. 3 See, e.g., International Securities Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’) Rule 720(b)(2). 4 The Exchange is also proposing to add text to Exchange Rule 1.1(fff) [sic] (Voluntary Professional) and Rule 1.1(ggg) [sic] (Professional) to include a reference to Rule 6.15. These designations are done on the Exchange on an order by order basis. Thus, through reference, professional orders will be treated as broker-dealer orders. In addition certain non-broker-dealer customers may have their orders treated as broker-dealer orders rather than as public customer orders for purposes of Rule 6.15. PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The Exchange believes that the proposal will limit obvious error trade nullification only to transactions involving non-broker-dealer customers. The Exchange believes that this approach will limit the number of nullifications while assuring that nonbroker-dealer customers will not have their erroneous trades adjusted through their limit price forcing such customer to spend (receive) more (less) money on erroneous transactions. In addition, the proposed changes to the rule will allow any non-professional customer orders to be subject to professional standards if that customer decides to designate an order as such.5 Non-broker-dealer customers are typically far less familiar with the dayto-day trading of the markets and are also less likely to be watching trading activity in a particular option throughout the day. Therefore, given the potential for drastic market swings, the Exchange believes that it is fair and reasonable and consistent with statutory standards to change the procedure for obvious errors involving at least one non-broker-dealer customer, and not for other market participants so as not to expose these customers to any additional risk. In addition, as stated above, these customers have the option of indicating they would like the treatment of their orders as if they originated from a professional.6 The proposed rule change is a fair way to address the issue of a trade executing through a non-broker-dealer customer’s limit order price while balancing the competing interest of certainty that trades stand versus dealing with the true errors. The proposed rule change would continue to entail specific and objective procedures. Furthermore, the proposed rule change more fairly balances the potential windfall to one market participant against the potential reconsidering of a trading decision under the guise of an error. The Exchange also believes it is fair and reasonable to treat all professional market participants equally, e.g. market-makers, brokerdealers, etc. As stated above, the Exchange believes that non-broker-dealer customers are far less familiar with the day-to-day trading of the markets and are also less likely to be watching trading activity in a particular option throughout the day. Therefore, the Exchange believes that it is fair and reasonable and consistent with statutory standards to change the procedure for obvious errors involving non-broker5 See note 4 supra. 6 Id. E:\FR\FM\18NON1.SGM 18NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 222 / Monday, November 18, 2013 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES dealer customers, and not for other market participants so as not to expose these customers to any additional risk. In addition, as stated above, these customers have the option of indicating they would like the treatment of their orders as if they were from professionals.7 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.8 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 9 requirements that the rules of an 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. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 10 requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. In particular, the proposal to nullify all erroneous transactions in which at least one non-broker-dealer customer is a party to the transaction and adjusting all other trades will help market participants to better hedge risk associated with these potentially erroneous transactions. By nullifying erroneous transactions which involve a non-broker-dealer customer, the Exchange is assuring that these nonprofessional customers will not receive a trade at a higher (lower) price than a limit price placed upon the transaction. In addition, the proposal is requiring trades in most circumstances to be honored. The proposal also allows for all parties to nullify any erroneous transaction as long as the two parties come to an agreement. The Exchange believes that adjusting all transactions that do not involve a non-broker-dealer customer is just and equitable because professional customers are more sophisticated and 7 Id. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 10 Id. familiar with the day to day trading swings. Though, as proposed, a professional that is not a market-maker may be adjusted through its limit price, the Exchange believes these professionals have adequate resources in place to manage this adjustment and would prefer the certainty of the proposed changes and to adjust these transactions (rather than nullify) to continue to hedge their risk. In addition, the Exchange believes that marketmakers and other professionals are similarly situated, and, thus, it is consistent to treat these groups in the same manner. Moreover, the market benefits from the least amount of nullifications because parties have more certainty about their executions. The Exchange also believes that assessing an adjustment penalty will encourage professionals to adjust and nullify a lesser amount of transactions which will benefit the market as a whole. Thus, the Exchange believes that the treatment of all professional orders in the same manner is consistent with the Act as it will allow the market to suffer fewer disruptions, in the form of adjustments or nullifications of trades after the fact, and treats similarly situated groups, namely market-makers and other professionals, in the same manner. The Exchange also notes that aligning the Exchange with other options exchanges will ensure less disruption to market participants as they will be treated consistently across the markets.11 Though the proposal will treat different groups of market participants differently, the Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly discriminating because it treats similarly situated groups in the same manner. More specifically, all professionals will be treated in a similar manner while non-professional customers will also be left with the choice to designate an order as professional, under Exchange Rule 1.1 and thus have the ability to be treated in the same manner as a professional. With this choice, all groups may be treated in the same manner. In addition, the proposal creates a safeguard for a non-professional customer that may not be as familiar with the specifics of every day trading (and does not choose to be treated as a professional) by nullifying all erroneous transactions in which they are a party. The Exchange acknowledges that the proposal may allow for some uncertainty to regarding whether a trade will be adjusted or nullified depending upon the nature of the parties to the transaction. More specifically, the 9 15 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:33 Nov 15, 2013 contra party will not know the category of the other party. Nonetheless, the Exchange believes the proposal continues to promote just and equitable principles of trade and protect investors and the public interest because it eliminates a more serious uncertainty of price uncertainty which is inherent in the current Exchange rule because the current rule takes the non-broker-dealer customer’s limit price into consideration while this proposal does not as it will be nullified unless agreed upon by the two parties. The Exchange also notes that this rule is substantially similar to another option exchange.12 Thus, market participants will receive similar treatment in the [sic] across the markets which eliminates confusion and promotes just and equitable principles of trade. B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Burden on Competition C2 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. Specifically, the proposal is meant to eliminate market participant confusion along with help market participants to better hedge the risk associated with erroneous options trades. C2 believes that the proposed rule change will relieve any burden on, or otherwise promote, competition because it creates less uncertainty about the treatment of erroneous trades which may encourage market participants to trade on the Exchange. 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 proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; B. impose any significant burden on competition; and C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 14 thereunder. At any time within 60 days 12 See note 3 supra. U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 13 15 11 See Jkt 232001 PO 00000 note 3 supra. Frm 00124 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69163 E:\FR\FM\18NON1.SGM 18NON1 69164 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 222 / Monday, November 18, 2013 / Notices of the filing of the 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved. 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: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Electronic Comments • Use the Commission’s Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– C2–2013–038 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–C2–2013–038. 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 Web site (http://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 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:33 Nov 15, 2013 Jkt 232001 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– 2013–038 and should be submitted on or before December 9, 2013. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.15 Kevin M. O’Neill, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2013–27472 Filed 11–15–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–70850; File No. SR–Phlx– 2013–109] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Box Spread Strategies November 12, 2013. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 30, 2013, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 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 the Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to adopt a strategy fee cap applicable to box spreads. While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated that the amendments be operative on November 1, 2013. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange’s Web site at http:// nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission’s Public Reference Room. 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 1 15 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 these 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 aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this filing is to amend the strategy fee caps which are currently located in Section II, entitled ‘‘Multiply Listed Options.’’ 3 Today, the Exchange caps fees on certain dividend, merger, short stock interest, reversal and conversion and jelly roll strategy floor option transactions. The Exchange is proposing to also cap fees on box spread strategy transactions. A box spread strategy synthesizes long and short stock positions to create a profit. Specifically, a long call and short put at one strike is combined with a short call and long put at a different strike to create synthetic long and synthetic short stock positions, respectively. The Exchange proposes to include this definition in Section II of the Pricing Schedule in the section entitled ‘‘Strategies Defined.’’ The Exchange proposes to offer a strategy cap for box spreads. Today, Specialist,4 Market Maker,5 Professional,6 Firm 7 and Broker-Dealer 8 3 This includes options overlying equities, ETFs, ETNs and indexes which are Multiply Listed. 4 A ‘‘Specialist’’ is an Exchange member who is registered as an options specialist pursuant to Rule 1020(a). 5 A ‘‘market maker’’ includes Registered Options Traders (Rule 1014(b)(i) and (ii)), which includes Streaming Quote Traders (see Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A)) and Remote Streaming Quote Traders (see Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B)). Directed Participants are also market makers. 6 The term ‘‘Professional’’ means any person or entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) places more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Rule 1000(b)(14). 7 The term ‘‘Firm’’ applies to any transaction that is identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the Firm range at OCC. 8 The term ‘‘Broker-Dealer’’ applies to any transaction which is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable within a particular category. E:\FR\FM\18NON1.SGM 18NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 222 (Monday, November 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69162-69164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27472]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70846; File No. SR-C2-2013-038]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; 
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change 
Relating to Obvious Error

November 12, 2013.
    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 October 28, 2013, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the 
``Exchange'' or ``C2'') filed with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described 
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the 
Exchange. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.15 (Obvious Error and 
Catastrophic Errors). The text of the proposed rule change is available 
on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.c2exchange.com/Legal/), at the 
Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public 
Reference Room.

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 these 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 aspects of such 
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Exchange Rule 6.15 (Obvious Error and Catastrophic Errors) governs 
the nullification and adjustment of options transactions. The Exchange 
is proposing to amend Rule 6.15(b)(2) to modify how the Exchange will 
nullify or adjust an obvious error. The Exchange believes this proposal 
will also harmonize its rules to more closely align with other options 
exchanges.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, e.g., International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'') 
Rule 720(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the current rule 6.15(b)(2)(A), the Exchange will adjust the 
price of an erroneous transaction to the Theoretical Price when the 
transaction is between two market-makers unless such parties agree to 
adjust the transaction to a different price or bust the trade within 
ten minutes of being notified by the Help Desk of the error. Pursuant 
to current Exchange Rule 6.15(b)(2)(B), transactions involving at least 
one non-C2 market-maker will be nullified unless both parties agree to 
adjust the transaction within thirty minutes of being notified by the 
Help Desk of the error.
    The Exchange is now proposing to amend Rule 6.15(b)(2) to modify 
the Exchange obvious error procedures by nullifying trades for 
transactions involving at least one non-broker-dealer customer and 
adjusting all other trades between groups that do not fall into this 
category including for example, a market maker or a broker-dealer.\4\ 
The Exchange believes that the proposal will protect investors by 
eliminating some uncertainty in the current rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange is also proposing to add text to Exchange Rule 
1.1(fff) [sic] (Voluntary Professional) and Rule 1.1(ggg) [sic] 
(Professional) to include a reference to Rule 6.15. These 
designations are done on the Exchange on an order by order basis. 
Thus, through reference, professional orders will be treated as 
broker-dealer orders. In addition certain non-broker-dealer 
customers may have their orders treated as broker-dealer orders 
rather than as public customer orders for purposes of Rule 6.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More specifically, the Exchange is first proposing to include all 
transactions in which neither party is a non-broker-dealer customer in 
the current Rule 6.15(b)(2)(A) instead of only including transactions 
between C2 market-makers. Next, the Exchange is proposing to add a 
provision to nullify all erroneous transactions between non-broker-
dealer customers unless both parties agree to an adjusted price within 
thirty minutes.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal will limit obvious error 
trade nullification only to transactions involving non-broker-dealer 
customers. The Exchange believes that this approach will limit the 
number of nullifications while assuring that non-broker-dealer 
customers will not have their erroneous trades adjusted through their 
limit price forcing such customer to spend (receive) more (less) money 
on erroneous transactions. In addition, the proposed changes to the 
rule will allow any non-professional customer orders to be subject to 
professional standards if that customer decides to designate an order 
as such.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See note 4 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Non-broker-dealer customers are typically far less familiar with 
the day-to-day trading of the markets and are also less likely to be 
watching trading activity in a particular option throughout the day. 
Therefore, given the potential for drastic market swings, the Exchange 
believes that it is fair and reasonable and consistent with statutory 
standards to change the procedure for obvious errors involving at least 
one non-broker-dealer customer, and not for other market participants 
so as not to expose these customers to any additional risk. In 
addition, as stated above, these customers have the option of 
indicating they would like the treatment of their orders as if they 
originated from a professional.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is a fair way to address the issue of a 
trade executing through a non-broker-dealer customer's limit order 
price while balancing the competing interest of certainty that trades 
stand versus dealing with the true errors. The proposed rule change 
would continue to entail specific and objective procedures. 
Furthermore, the proposed rule change more fairly balances the 
potential windfall to one market participant against the potential 
reconsidering of a trading decision under the guise of an error. The 
Exchange also believes it is fair and reasonable to treat all 
professional market participants equally, e.g. market-makers, broker-
dealers, etc.
    As stated above, the Exchange believes that non-broker-dealer 
customers are far less familiar with the day-to-day trading of the 
markets and are also less likely to be watching trading activity in a 
particular option throughout the day. Therefore, the Exchange believes 
that it is fair and reasonable and consistent with statutory standards 
to change the procedure for obvious errors involving non-broker-

[[Page 69163]]

dealer customers, and not for other market participants so as not to 
expose these customers to any additional risk. In addition, as stated 
above, these customers have the option of indicating they would like 
the treatment of their orders as if they were from professionals.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with 
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and 
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, 
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\8\ Specifically, the 
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirements that the rules of an 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. Additionally, 
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be 
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, 
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposal to nullify all erroneous transactions 
in which at least one non-broker-dealer customer is a party to the 
transaction and adjusting all other trades will help market 
participants to better hedge risk associated with these potentially 
erroneous transactions. By nullifying erroneous transactions which 
involve a non-broker-dealer customer, the Exchange is assuring that 
these non-professional customers will not receive a trade at a higher 
(lower) price than a limit price placed upon the transaction. In 
addition, the proposal is requiring trades in most circumstances to be 
honored. The proposal also allows for all parties to nullify any 
erroneous transaction as long as the two parties come to an agreement.
    The Exchange believes that adjusting all transactions that do not 
involve a non-broker-dealer customer is just and equitable because 
professional customers are more sophisticated and familiar with the day 
to day trading swings. Though, as proposed, a professional that is not 
a market-maker may be adjusted through its limit price, the Exchange 
believes these professionals have adequate resources in place to manage 
this adjustment and would prefer the certainty of the proposed changes 
and to adjust these transactions (rather than nullify) to continue to 
hedge their risk. In addition, the Exchange believes that market-makers 
and other professionals are similarly situated, and, thus, it is 
consistent to treat these groups in the same manner. Moreover, the 
market benefits from the least amount of nullifications because parties 
have more certainty about their executions. The Exchange also believes 
that assessing an adjustment penalty will encourage professionals to 
adjust and nullify a lesser amount of transactions which will benefit 
the market as a whole. Thus, the Exchange believes that the treatment 
of all professional orders in the same manner is consistent with the 
Act as it will allow the market to suffer fewer disruptions, in the 
form of adjustments or nullifications of trades after the fact, and 
treats similarly situated groups, namely market-makers and other 
professionals, in the same manner. The Exchange also notes that 
aligning the Exchange with other options exchanges will ensure less 
disruption to market participants as they will be treated consistently 
across the markets.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See note 3 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Though the proposal will treat different groups of market 
participants differently, the Exchange believes that the proposal is 
not unfairly discriminating because it treats similarly situated groups 
in the same manner. More specifically, all professionals will be 
treated in a similar manner while non-professional customers will also 
be left with the choice to designate an order as professional, under 
Exchange Rule 1.1 and thus have the ability to be treated in the same 
manner as a professional. With this choice, all groups may be treated 
in the same manner. In addition, the proposal creates a safeguard for a 
non-professional customer that may not be as familiar with the 
specifics of every day trading (and does not choose to be treated as a 
professional) by nullifying all erroneous transactions in which they 
are a party.
    The Exchange acknowledges that the proposal may allow for some 
uncertainty to regarding whether a trade will be adjusted or nullified 
depending upon the nature of the parties to the transaction. More 
specifically, the contra party will not know the category of the other 
party. Nonetheless, the Exchange believes the proposal continues to 
promote just and equitable principles of trade and protect investors 
and the public interest because it eliminates a more serious 
uncertainty of price uncertainty which is inherent in the current 
Exchange rule because the current rule takes the non-broker-dealer 
customer's limit price into consideration while this proposal does not 
as it will be nullified unless agreed upon by the two parties. The 
Exchange also notes that this rule is substantially similar to another 
option exchange.\12\ Thus, market participants will receive similar 
treatment in the [sic] across the markets which eliminates confusion 
and promotes just and equitable principles of trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See note 3 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    C2 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. Specifically, the proposal is 
meant to eliminate market participant confusion along with help market 
participants to better hedge the risk associated with erroneous options 
trades. C2 believes that the proposed rule change will relieve any 
burden on, or otherwise promote, competition because it creates less 
uncertainty about the treatment of erroneous trades which may encourage 
market participants to trade on the Exchange.

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 
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public 
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was 
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has 
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and 
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \14\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days

[[Page 69164]]

of the filing of the 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. If the Commission takes such action, the 
Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed 
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include 
File Number SR-C2-2013-038 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-C2-2013-038. 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 Web site (http://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 
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All 
comments received will be posted without change; 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-C2-2013-038 and should be 
submitted on or before December 9, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27472 Filed 11-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P