Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Notices 82005 

33 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90245 

(October 22, 2020), 85 FR 68400. 

4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

5 Id. 

6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee 

changes December 1, 2020 (SR–CBOE–2020–113). 

On December 4, 2020, the Exchange withdrew that 

filing and submitted this proposal. 

4See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Monthly 

Market Volume Summary (November 25, 2020), 

available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/ 

market_statistics/. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.33

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27727 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–90644; File No. SR– 

NASDAQ–2020–069] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of 

Designation of a Longer Period for 

Commission Action on a Proposed 

Rule Change, as Modified by 

Amendment No. 1, To Exclude Special 

Purpose Acquisition Companies From 

the Requirement That at Least 50% of 

a Company’s Round Lot Holders Each 

Hold Unrestricted Securities With a 

Market Value of at Least $2,500 

December 11, 2020. 

On October 8, 2020, The Nasdaq 

Stock Market LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’ 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 to 

exclude special purpose acquisition 

companies from the requirement that at 

least 50% of a company’s round lot 

holders each hold unrestricted 

securities with a market value of at least 

$2,500. On October 21, 2020, the 

Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the 

proposed rule change, which amended 

and replaced the proposed rule change 

in its entirety. The proposed rule 

change, as modified by Amendment No. 

1, was published for comment in the 

Federal Register on October 28, 2020.3

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 4 provides 

that within 45 days of the publication of 

notice of the filing of a proposed rule 

change, or within such longer period up 

to 90 days as the Commission may 

designate if it finds such longer period 

to be appropriate and publishes its 

reasons for so finding, or as to which the 

self-regulatory organization consents, 

the Commission shall either approve the 

proposed rule change, disapprove the 

proposed rule change, or institute 

proceedings to determine whether the 

proposed rule change should be 

disapproved. The 45th day after 

publication of the notice for this 

proposed rule change is December 12, 

2020. The Commission is extending this 

45-day time period. 

The Commission finds it appropriate 

to designate a longer period within 

which to take action on the proposed 

rule change so that it has sufficient time 

to consider the proposed rule change. 

Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant 

to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,5

designates January 26, 2021, as the date 

by which the Commission shall either 

approve or disapprove, or institute 

proceedings to determine whether to 

disapprove, the proposed rule change, 

as modified by Amendment No. 1 (File 

No. SR–NASDAQ–2020–069). 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.6

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27725 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–90642; File No. SR–CBOE– 

2020–115] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe 

Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend the Fees 

Schedule With Respect to Certain Fees 

Related to Qualified Contingent Cross 

Transactions the Exchange’s LMM 

Incentive Programs 

December 11, 2020. 

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 December 

4, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘Cboe Options’’) 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 

Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’ 

or ‘‘Cboe Options’’) proposes to amend 

the Fees Schedule with respect to 

certain fees related to Qualified 

Contingent Cross transactions the 

Exchange’s LMM incentive programs. 

The text of the proposed rule change is 

attached [sic] as Exhibit 5. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is also available on the Exchange’s 

website (http://www.cboe.com/ 

AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatory

Home.aspx), 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 

The Exchange proposes to amend its 

Fees Schedule with respect to Qualified 

Contingent Cross (‘‘QCC’’) transaction 

fees and the Exchange’s Lead MarketMaker (‘‘LMM’’) programs.3

The Exchange first notes that it 

operates in a highly competitive market 

in which market participants can 

readily direct order flow to competing 

venues if they deem fee levels at a 

particular venue to be excessive or 

incentives to be insufficient. More 

specifically, the Exchange is only one of 

16 options venues to which market 

participants may direct their order flow. 

Based on publicly available information, 

no single options exchange has more 

than 15% of the market share.4 Thus, in 

such a low-concentrated and highly 

competitive market, no single options 

exchange possesses significant pricing 

power in the execution of option order 

flow. The Exchange believes that the 

ever-shifting market share among the 

exchanges from month to month 

82006 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Notices 

5Pursuant to this proposal, Professional Customer 

(Capacity U) QCC orders would receive fee code QC 

instead of fee code QN. 

6See e.g., BOX Options Fee Schedule, Section 

1(D), Qualified Contingent Cross (‘‘QCC’’) 

Transactions, which provides that no fees are 

assessed for Customer and Professional Customer 

QCC transactions. See also NYSE American Options 

Fee Schedule, Section 1(F), QCC Fees and Credits, 

which also provides that no fees are assessed for 

Customer and Professional Customer QCC 

transactions. 

7An LMM’s ‘‘worst’’ quoting day will be based on 

the highest number of series missed and not the 

percentage of series missed. As an example, assume 

an LMM met the heightened quoting standard for 

all series every day of a given month except for two 

days. On ‘‘day 1’’ there were 100 available series 

and the LMM didn’t meet the heightened quoting 

standard for 40 of those series (i.e., missed 40% of 

the available series) and on ‘‘day 2’’ there were 50 

available series and the LMM didn’t meet the 

heightened quoting standard for 25 of those series 

(i.e., missed 50% of the available series). In this 

scenario, the Exchange would omit from its 

calculation ‘‘day 1’’, because it missed a higher 

number of series (40 vs 25) even though the LMM 

missed a lower percentage of available series (40% 

vs 50%). The Exchange notes that if an LMM misses 

the same number of series on more than one day, 

it will still omit only one day to eliminate from the 

calculation. 

8 15 U.S.C. 78f. 

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

10 15 U.S.C. 78f.(b)(5). 

demonstrates that market participants 

can shift order flow or discontinue to 

reduce use of certain categories of 

products in response to fee changes. 

Accordingly, competitive forces 

constrain the Exchange’s transaction 

fees, and market participants can readily 

trade on competing venues if they deem 

pricing levels at those other venues to 

be more favorable. In response to 

competitive pricing, the Exchange, like 

other options exchanges, offers rebates 

and assesses fees for certain order types 

executed on or routed through the 

Exchange. 

QCC Fees 

By way of background, a QCC order 

is comprised of an ‘initiating order’ to 

buy (sell) at least 1,000 contracts, 

coupled with a contra-side order to sell 

(buy) an equal number of contracts and 

that for complex QCC transactions, the 

1,000 contracts minimum is applied per 

leg. Currently, the Exchange assesses no 

fee for Customer (‘‘C’’ capacity) QCC 

transactions and $0.17 per contract side 

for non-Customer transactions. In 

addition, the Exchange provides a $0.10 

per contract credit for the initiating 

order side, regardless of origin code. 

The Exchange proposes to eliminate the 

$0.17 transaction fee for Professional 

(‘‘U’’ capacity) QCC orders (i.e., such 

transactions would be free).5 The 

Exchange similarly proposes to provide 

that the $0.10 per contract credit for the 

initiating order side would not apply to 

(i) Professional to Professional 

executions or (ii) Professional to 

Customer executions, in light of the fact 

that the Exchange is proposing to waive 

the transaction fee for Professional QCC 

Orders. More specifically, since the 

Exchange is proposing to eliminate the 

fee for Professional QCC transactions, 

and since Customers already aren’t 

assessed a fee for such transactions, the 

Exchange does not wish to provide a 

credit for transactions that do not 

generate any fees. The proposed change 

is consistent with the current Fees 

Schedule which provides that the QCC 

credit is not applied to Customer to 

Customer QCC executions. The purpose 

of the proposed change to waive fees for 

Professional QCC orders is to 

incentivize the sending of QCC orders to 

the Exchange by these market 

participants and compete with other 

Exchanges that similarly do not assess 

fees to QCC orders from Professional 

Customers.6

LMM Programs 

The Exchange next proposes to amend 

each of its LMM Programs (i.e., the 

MSCI LMM Incentive Program, the GTH 

VIX/VIXW LMM Incentive Programs, 

the GTH SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive 

Program and the RTH SPESG LMM 

Incentive Programs (collectively ‘‘LMM 

Programs’’)). The LMM Programs each 

currently provide a specified rebate 

where the LMM(s) in the respective 

classes meet certain prescribed 

heightened quoting standards as 

specified in the respective LMM 

Program tables in the Fees Schedule. 

The Exchange notes that the LMMs for 

each program are not currently obligated 

to satisfy the respective heightened 

quoting standards detailed in the Fees 

Schedule, but rather, are eligible to 

receive the respective rebates if they 

satisfy the prescribed heightened 

quoting standards, which the Exchange 

believes encourage LMMs to provide 

liquidity in their appointed classes. The 

Exchange also notes that the notes 

section for each LMM Program provides 

that the Exchange may consider 

exceptions to the prescribed quoting 

standards based on demonstrated legal 

or regulatory requirements or other 

mitigating circumstances. The Exchange 

proposes to adopt and codify another 

exception to the prescribed quoting 

standards for each LMM Program. 

Particularly, the Exchange wishes to 

provide that for each program, in 

calculating whether an LMM meets the 

heightened quoting standard each 

month, the Exchange will exclude from 

the calculation the LMM’s worst quoting 

day in that month (i.e., the business day 

on which the LMM met or exceeded the 

heightened quoting standard in the least 

amount of series).7 The Exchange 

proposes to adopt this exception to 

provide further flexibility for LMMs. For 

example, the Exchange notes that there 

may be certain circumstances, such as a 

day of extreme volatility or where the 

LMM has a system issue, that may 

impact an LMM’s ability to meet the 

heightened quoting standards for that 

day, which could result in the LMM no 

longer being able to satisfy the 

heightened quoting standard for the 

remainder of the month. The Exchange 

believes this proposed change will 

further encourage LMMs to continue to 

quote aggressively in a class throughout 

the entire month despite one poor 

performing day. For example, absent the 

proposed rule change, if an LMM has a 

poor performing day early in the month, 

the LMM may no longer have an 

incentive to continue to quote at the 

prescribed heightened levels for the 

remainder of the month as it would 

know it would no longer be eligible to 

receive the LMM rebate for that month 

even if it continued to meet or exceed 

the prescribed quoting standards. 

Accordingly, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change would eliminate 

the potential disincentive that could 

occur if one poor performing day 

prevented an LMM from meeting the 

heightened quoting standards. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,8

in general, and furthers the objectives of 

Section 6(b)(4),9 in particular, as it is 

designed to provide for the equitable 

allocation of reasonable dues, fees and 

other charges among its Trading Permit 

Holders (‘‘TPHs’’) and issuers and other 

persons using its facilities. The 

Exchange also believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) 10

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, and, 

particularly, is not designed to permit 

unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Notices 82007 

11See e.g., BOX Options Fee Schedule, Section 

1(D), Qualified Contingent Cross (‘‘QCC’’) 

Transactions, which provides that no fees are 

assessed for Customer and Professional Customer 

QCC transactions. See also NYSE American Options 

Fee Schedule, Section 1(F), QCC Fees and Credits, 

which also provides that no fees are assessed for 

Customer and Professional Customer QCC 

transactions. 

12See NYSE American Options Fee Schedule, 

Section 1(F), QCC Fees and Credits, which provides 

Floor Brokers will not receive a credit for QCC 

trades that have a Customer or Professional 

Customer, or both, on both sides of the trade. 

13See Nasdaq ISE LLC, Options 7 Pricing 

Schedule, Section 3, Regular Order Fees and 

Rebates, Footnote 5. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed amendments to the Fees 

Schedule are reasonable, equitable and 

not unfairly discriminatory. In 

particular, the Exchange believes the 

proposal to not assess a fee for 

Professional QCC orders is reasonable 

because such market participants would 

not be subject to a transaction fee for 

such transactions. The Exchange notes 

other Exchanges also waive fees for 

Professional QCC transactions.11

Additionally, the proposed change 

would apply to all Professional alike 

and the proposed fee changes reflect a 

competitive pricing structure designed 

to compete with other exchanges that 

similarly do not assess fees on these 

market participants. The Exchange 

believes the proposed rule change will 

also incentivize Professionals to direct 

their QCC order flow to the Exchange, 

which the Exchange believes would 

enhance market quality to the benefit of 

all TPHs. 

The Exchange believes it’s reasonable 

to eliminate the credit on the initiating 

order side of a QCC transaction for (i) 

Professional to Professional and (ii) 

Professional to Customer QCC 

executions as the Exchange will no 

longer receive any transaction fees for 

such transactions in light of its proposal 

to eliminate a transaction fee for 

Professional QCC orders. The Exchange 

notes another exchange similarly waives 

QCC-related credits for similar 

transactions.12 The Exchange believes 

the elimination of the proposed credit is 

equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because it applies to all 

Professionals and because such market 

participants will no longer be subject to 

transaction fees for QCC transactions. 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change to omit an LMM’s worst 

quoting day each month is reasonable 

because it will encourage LMMs to 

quote aggressively in a class throughout 

the entire month despite one poor 

performing day. As discussed above, 

there may be days on which an LMM 

cannot quote aggressively (e.g., LMM 

has a system issue) and in certain 

months, one poor performing day can 

prevent an LMM from meeting the 

heightened quoting standard required to 

receive the rebate under the LMM 

Program. Moreover, in such months 

where an LMM has a poor performing 

day, an LMM may be discouraged from 

quoting aggressively the remainder of 

the month if it knows it were no longer 

eligible to receive the rebate that month. 

This can be especially problematic if a 

poor performing day occurs early in the 

month. The Exchange notes that it 

adopted each of its LMM programs and 

corresponding financial incentives to 

ensure there was sufficient incentive for 

a TPH to undertake an obligation to 

quote at heightened levels, without 

which could result in lower levels of 

liquidity in the LMM Program classes. 

Accordingly, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change will encourage 

LMMs to quote aggressively in a class 

throughout the entire month (and 

thereby ensure sufficient liquidity), 

notwithstanding a poor performing day. 

The Exchange also notes that another 

exchange similarly omits a MarketMaker’s worst quoting day each month 

under from one of its financial incentive 

programs.13 The Exchange believes the 

proposed change is equitable and not 

unfairly discriminatory as it applies 

equally to all appointed LMMs. 

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. First, the 

Exchange notes that the proposed 

changes apply uniformly to similarlysituated TPHs. The Exchange believes 

the proposed rule change serves to 

increase intramarket competition by 

incentivizing Professionals to direct 

their QCC orders to the Exchange, 

which will bring greater volume and 

liquidity, thereby benefitting all market 

participants by providing more trading 

opportunities and tighter spreads. 

Further, the Exchange notes that other 

Exchanges don’t assess fees to 

Professional (or Customer) QCC 

transactions. The Exchange does not 

believe that the proposed rule change 

related to LMM Programs will impose 

any burden on intramarket competition 

that is not necessary or appropriate in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act 

because it applies uniformly to any 

LMM appointed under these programs, 

which market participants play a crucial 

role in providing active and liquid 

markets in their respective assigned 

products. 

Next, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change does not impose 

any burden on intermarket competition 

that is not necessary or appropriate in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 

As previously discussed, the Exchange 

operates in a highly competitive market. 

TPHs have numerous alternative venues 

they may participate on and direct their 

order flow, including 15 other options 

exchanges. Additionally, the Exchange 

represents a small percentage of the 

overall market. Based on publicly 

available information, no single options 

exchange has more than 15% of the 

market share. Therefore, no exchange 

possesses significant pricing power in 

the execution of order flow. Indeed, 

participants can readily choose to send 

their orders to other exchanges and offexchange venues if they deem fee levels 

at those other venues to be more 

favorable. As noted above, the Exchange 

believes that the proposed QCC 

transaction fee change is comparable to 

that of other exchanges offering similar 

QCC functionality. Also, while the 

proposed change to the LMM Programs 

applies only to the Exchange, another 

exchange provides for a similar 

exception as proposed for one of its 

financial incentive programs. Moreover, 

the Commission has repeatedly 

expressed its preference for competition 

over regulatory intervention in 

determining prices, products, and 

services in the securities markets. 

Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the 

Commission highlighted the importance 

of market forces in determining prices 

and SRO revenues and, also, recognized 

that current regulation of the market 

system ‘‘has been remarkably successful 

in promoting market competition in its 

broader forms that are most important to 

investors and listed companies.’’ The 

fact that this market is competitive has 

also long been recognized by the courts. 

In NetCoalition v. Securities and 

Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit 

stated as follows: ‘‘[n]o one disputes 

that competition for order flow is 

‘fierce.’ . . . As the SEC explained, ‘[i]n 

the U.S. national market system, buyers 

and sellers of securities, and the brokerdealers that act as their order-routing 

agents, have a wide range of choices of 

where to route orders for execution’; 

[and] ‘no exchange can afford to take its 

market share percentages for granted’ 

because ‘no exchange possesses a 

monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in 

the execution of order flow from broker 

dealers’. . . .’’. Accordingly, the 

Exchange does not believe its proposed 

fee change imposes any burden on 

82008 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Notices 

14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

15 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f). 

16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88992 

(June 2, 2020), 85 FR 35142 (June 8, 2020) (SR– 

PEARL–2020–06) (Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend 

Exchange Rule 404, Series of Option Contracts 

Open for Trading, and Rule 510, Minimum Price 

Variations and Minimum Trading Increments, To 

Conform the Rules to Section 3.1 of the Plan for the 

Purpose of Developing and Implementing 

Procedures Designed To Facilitate the Listing and 

Trading of Standardized Options). 

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 has not solicited, and 

does not intend to solicit, comments on 

this proposed rule change. The 

Exchange has not received any written 

comments from members or other 

interested parties. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The foregoing rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 

of the Act 14 and paragraph (f) of Rule 

19b–4 15 thereunder. At any time within 

60 days 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: 

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– 

CBOE–2020–115 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–CBOE–2020–115. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (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 website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 

10:00 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. Persons 

submitting comments are cautioned that 

we do not redact or edit personal 

identifying information from comment 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–CBOE– 

2020–115 and should be submitted on 

or before January 7, 2021. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.16

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27723 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–90640; File No. SR– 

PEARL–2020–31] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX 

PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend the Fee 

Schedule 

December 11, 2020. 

Pursuant to the provisions of 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 December 1, 2020, MIAX PEARL, 

LLC (‘‘MIAX PEARL’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) 

filed with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) a 

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 is filing a proposal to 

amend the MIAX PEARL Fee Schedule 

(the ‘‘Fee Schedule’’). 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s website at 

http://www.miaxoptions.com/rulefilings/pearl at MIAX PEARL’s principal 

office, 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 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

Fee Schedule for the Exchange’s options 

market to amend the exchange 

groupings of options exchanges within 

the routing fee table in Section 1)b) of 

the Fee Schedule. 

Currently, the Exchange assesses 

routing fees based upon (i) the origin 

type of the order, (ii) whether or not it 

is an order for standard option classes 

in the Penny Interval Program 3 (‘‘Penny 

classes’’) or an order for standard option 

classes which are not in the Penny 

Interval Program (‘‘Non-Penny classes’’) 

(or other explicitly identified classes), 

and (iii) to which away market it is 

being routed. This assessment practice 

is identical to the routing fees 

assessment practice currently utilized 

by the Exchange’s affiliates, Miami 

International Securities Exchange, LLC