Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2024 / Notices 87435 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3FINRA Rule 12506 (Document Production Lists) 

describes the documents that are presumed to be 

discoverable in all arbitrations between a customer 

and a member firm or associated person. 

4Simplified customer arbitrations are arbitrations 

in which the dispute between a customer and 

member firm or associated person involves $50,000 

or less, exclusive of interest and expenses. See 

FINRA Rule 12800(a). 

5See Exchange Act Release No. 100204 (May 21, 

2024), 89 FR 46210 (May 28, 2024) (File No. SR– 

FINRA2024–008) (‘‘Notice’’). 

6The comment letters are available at https://

www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024-008/ 

srfinra2024008.htm. 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Jennaca Upperman; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

6. Docket No(s).: MC2025–164 and 

K2025–162; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 541 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Jennaca Upperman; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

7. Docket No(s).: MC2025–165 and 

K2025–163; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 542 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Katalin Clendenin; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

8. Docket No(s).: MC2025–166 and 

K2025–164; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground 

Advantage Contract 409 to the 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing 

Acceptance Date: October 25, 2024; 

Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 

3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public 

Representative: Christopher Mohr; 

Comments Due: November 4, 2024. 

9. Docket No(s).: MC2025–167 and 

K2025–165; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground 

Advantage Contract 410 to the 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing 

Acceptance Date: October 25, 2024; 

Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 

3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public 

Representative: Samuel Robinson; 

Comments Due: November 4, 2024. 

10. Docket No(s).: MC2025–168 and 

K2025–166; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 543 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Katalin Clendenin; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

11. Docket No(s).: MC2025–169 and 

K2025–167; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 544 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Jana Slovinska; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

12. Docket No(s).: MC2025–170 and 

K2025–168; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 545 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Kenneth Moeller; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

13. Docket No(s).: MC2025–171 and 

K2025–169; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 546 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Anaswar Jayakumar; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

14. Docket No(s).: MC2025–172 and 

K2025–170; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 547 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Anaswar Jayakumar; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

15. Docket No(s).: MC2025–173 and 

K2025–171; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority 

Mail & USPS Ground Advantage 

Contract 548 to the Competitive Product 

List and Notice of Filing Materials 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

October 25, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 

CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: 

Maxine Bradley; Comments Due: 

November 4, 2024. 

III. Summary Proceeding(s) 

None. See section II for public 

proceedings. 

This Notice will be published in the 

Federal Register. 

Erica A. Barker, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25424 Filed 10–31–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–101449; File No. SR– 

FINRA–2024–008] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a 

Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by 

Partial Amendment No. 1, To Amend 

FINRA Rule 12800 (Simplified 

Arbitration) To Clarify and Amend the 

Applicability of the Document 

Production Lists 

October 28, 2024. 

I. Introduction 

On May 13, 2024, the Financial 

Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 

(‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section 

19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act 

of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule 

19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule 

change (SR–FINRA–2024–008) to 

amend FINRA Rule 12800 (Simplified 

Arbitration) of the FINRA Code of 

Arbitration Procedure for Customer 

Disputes (‘‘Customer Code’’). The 

proposed rule change, as subsequently 

modified by a partial amendment 

(‘‘Partial Amendment No. 1’’), would 

address the applicability of the lists of 

documents that are presumed to be 

discoverable in regular arbitrations 

between a customer and a member or 

associated person (‘‘Document 

Production Lists’’) 3 to simplified 

customer arbitrations administered 

under FINRA Rule 12800.4

The proposed rule change was 

published for public comment in the 

Federal Register on May 28, 2024.5 The 

public comment period closed on June 

18, 2024. The Commission received 

comment letters related to this filing.6

On July 8, 2024, FINRA consented to an 

extension of the time period in which 

the Commission must approve the 

proposed rule change, disapprove the 

proposed rule change, or institute 

proceedings to determine whether to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
87436 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2024 / Notices 

7See letter from Carissa Laughlin, Principal 

Counsel, Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to 

Lourdes Gonzalez, Assistant Chief Counsel, 

Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, 

dated July 8, 2024, https://www.finra.org/sites/ 

default/files/2024-07/SR-FINRA-2024-008- 

extension1.pdf. 

8See letter from Carissa Laughlin, Principal 

Counsel, Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to 

Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated 

August 7, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/comments/srfinra-2024-008/srfinra2024008-503775-1470022.pdf 

(‘‘FINRA Response Letter’’); see also Partial 

Amendment No. 1, https://www.finra.org/sites/ 

default/files/2024-08/SR-FINRA-2024-008-PartialA-1.pdf. 

9See Exchange Act Release No. 34–100787 (Aug. 

21, 2024), 89 FR 68686, (Aug. 27, 2024), File No. 

SR–FINRA–2024–008 (‘‘OIP’’). 

10The comment letters received in response to 

the OIP are available at https://www.sec.gov/ 

comments/sr-finra-2024-008/srfinra2024008.htm. 

11https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/ 

ArbMed/p394527.pdf. 

12See Notice at 46210. In addition to describing 

the Document Production Lists, the Discovery 

Guide includes information about the 

circumstances under which the parties may object 

to the production of documents on the Document 

Production Lists, the parties’ ability to request 

additional documents other than those included on 

the Document Production Lists, the process for 

obtaining the production of documents from nonparties, the forms that the production of documents 

should take, and the parties’ right to object to the 

production of documents based on confidentiality 

and privilege concerns. See Notice at 46211. The 

FINRA Discovery Guide and Document Production 

Lists do not apply to arbitrations administered 

under the Code of Arbitration Procedure for 

Industry Disputes. See Notice at 46210 n.3. 

13See Notice at 46210; see also FINRA Rule 

12506. 

14 Id.; see also FINRA Rule 12506(a). 

15See Notice at 46210; see also https://

www.finra.org/sites/default/files/ArbMed/ 

p394527.pdf. 

16See Notice at 46210; see also FINRA Rule 

12800(c)(2). 

17See Notice at 46210; see also FINRA Rule 

12800(c)(3). 

18See Notice at 46210; see also FINRA Rule 

12800(c)(3)(A); see also FINRA DRS Party’s 

Reference Guide, p. 31, https://www.finra.org/sites/ 

default/files/Partys-Reference-Guide.pdf 

(explaining that ‘‘[t]he Document Production Lists 

in the Discovery Guide as described in FINRA Rule 

12506 do not apply to simplified [customer] 

arbitrations decided on the papers or decided by 

special proceeding. However, the Discovery Guide 

does apply to simplified cases in which a customer 

requests a regular hearing.’’); see also https://

www.finra.org/arbitration-mediation/simplifiedarbitrations. See Notice at 46210 n.11 and 

accompanying text; see also infra note 24. 

19See Notice at 46210; see also FINRA Rule 

12800(c)(3)(B). 

20See Notice at 46210. FINRA Rule 12800(g)(1) 

provides that the Document Production Lists ‘‘do 

not apply to arbitrations subject to this rule’’ (i.e., 

paper cases and special proceedings). Notice at 

46210. 

21Notice at 46210; see FINRA Rule 12800(g)(1). 

22See Notice at 46210; see also FINRA Rule 

12800(g)(2) (providing that all production requests 

must be served on all other parties and filed with 

the Director within 30 days from the date that the 

last answer is due; any response or objection to a 

production request must be served on all other 

parties and filed with the Director within 10 days 

of the receipt of the request). 

23See Notice at 46210. 

24See id. at 46211. The proposed rule change also 

would make technical changes to Rule 12800. 

Currently, FINRA Rule 12800(c)(3)(A) states that, 

when a customer requests a regular hearing, the 

‘‘regular provisions’’ of the Customer Code relating 

to prehearings and hearings apply. As noted above, 

DRS has issued guidance clarifying this language to 

mean that the Document Production Lists apply in 

simplified customer arbitrations in which the 

customer requests a regular hearing. See Notice at 

46212; see also supra note 18. The proposed rule 

change would codify this guidance. See Notice at 

46212. Specifically, proposed Rule 12800(g)(1)(A) 

would provide that ‘‘[t]he Document Production 

Lists, described in Rule 12506, apply to arbitrations 

in which the customer requests an Option One 

hearing.’’ 

approve or disapprove the proposed 

rule change to August 26, 2024.7 On 

August 7, 2024, FINRA responded to the 

comment letters received in response to 

the Notice and filed Partial Amendment 

No. 1 to modify the proposed rule 

change.8

On August 27, 2024, the Commission 

published a notice of filing of Partial 

Amendment No. 1 and an order 

instituting proceedings to determine 

whether to approve or disapprove the 

proposed rule change, as modified by 

Partial Amendment No. 1.9 The 

Commission received additional 

comment letters in response to the 

OIP.10 This order approves the proposed 

rule change, as modified by Partial 

Amendment No. 1 (hereinafter referred 

to as the ‘‘proposed rule change’’ unless 

otherwise specified). 

II. Description of the Proposed Rule 

Change 

A. Background 

FINRA Dispute Resolution Services 

(‘‘DRS’’) provides a Discovery Guide 11

to help guide the parties and arbitrators 

through the discovery process in 

customer arbitrations.12 The Document 

Production Lists, which are included in 

the Discovery Guide, outline 

presumptively discoverable documents 

that the parties should exchange, 

without arbitrator or DRS staff 

intervention.13

Document Production Lists 1 and 2 

describe the documents that are 

presumed to be discoverable in all 

arbitrations between a customer and a 

member firm or associated person, 

except in simplified customer 

arbitrations as explained below.14 List 1 

outlines the documents that member 

firms and associated persons shall 

produce; List 2 outlines the documents 

that customers shall produce.15 The 

proposed rule change would affect the 

applicability of the Document 

Production Lists in simplified customer 

arbitrations. 

There are three types of simplified 

customer arbitrations. If the customer 

does not request a hearing, the arbitrator 

will render an award based on the 

pleadings and other materials submitted 

by the parties (‘‘paper cases’’).16 If the 

customer requests a hearing, the 

customer must select between one of 

two hearing options, known as an 

Option One hearing and an Option Two 

hearing.17 If the customer requests an 

Option One hearing, the regular 

provisions of the Customer Code 

relating to prehearings and hearings 

apply (‘‘regular hearing’’), including the 

Document Production Lists.18

Alternatively, the customer may request 

an Option Two special proceeding, 

which is an abbreviated hearing 

(‘‘special proceeding’’).19

Currently, the Document Production 

Lists do not apply in paper cases and 

special proceedings.20 Accordingly, the 

parties in such proceedings must 

request documents and other 

information from each other, pursuant 

to FINRA Rule 12800(g)(2). However, an 

arbitrator may exercise discretion to use 

relevant portions of the Document 

Production Lists in paper cases and 

special proceedings ‘‘in a manner 

consistent with the expedited nature of 

simplified proceedings.’’ 21 Absent such 

an exercise of discretion by the 

arbitrator, in order to obtain discovery 

in these proceedings, the parties must 

request documents and other 

information from each other without the 

benefit of the Document Production 

Lists.22 As a result, no documents or 

information are presumptively 

discoverable in paper cases and special 

proceedings, but they are presumptively 

discoverable in simplified customer 

arbitrations in which the customer 

requests a regular hearing as noted 

above.23

B. Proposed Rule Change 

The proposed rule change would 

amend FINRA Rule 12800(g)(1) to give 

customers in paper cases and special 

proceedings the option to elect whether 

they want the Document Production 

Lists to apply to all parties.24

Proposed Rule 12800(g)(1)(B) states 

that the Document Production Lists 

described in FINRA Rule 12506 would 

not apply in paper cases or special 

proceedings unless: (1) the customer 

requests that they apply at the time he 

or she initiates an arbitration pursuant 

to Rule 12302 (Filing and Serving an 

Initial Statement of Claim) or, (2) if the 

customer is a respondent, he or she 

requests that they apply no later than 

the answer due date pursuant to Rule 

12303 (Answering the Statement of 

Claim), regardless of the parties’ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2024 / Notices 87437 

25 Id. FINRA Rule 12303 provides that 

‘‘respondent(s) must serve each other party with an 

answer to the statement of claim within 45 days of 

receipt of the statement of claim. FINRA Rule 

12207(a) provides that the parties may agree in 

writing to extend or modify the deadline for serving 

an answer.’’ See Notice at 46211 n.13. 

26Nothing in the Discovery Guide precludes the 

parties from voluntarily agreeing to an exchange of 

documents in a manner different from that set forth 

in the Discovery Guide. FINRA stated that it 

encourages parties to agree to the voluntary 

exchange of documents and to stipulate to various 

matters. See Notice at 46211 n.19; see also https:// 

www.finra.org/sites/default/files/ArbMed/ 

p394527.pdf. 

27 In approving this rule change, the Commission 

has considered the rule’s impact on efficiency, 

competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 

78c(f). 

28 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 

29See supra note 22. 

30A commenter suggested a technical amendment 

to proposed Rule 12800(g)(1)(B) to make clear that 

the Document Production Lists are found in Rule 

12506 so that a pro se investor is not confused 

about the applicability of the Document Production 

Lists when pursuing a paper case or special 

proceeding. See letter from Nikki Junda, Student 

Intern, Elissa Germaine, Supervising Attorney, and 

Christine Lazaro, Supervising Attorney, Securities 

Arbitration Clinic of St. John’s University School of 

Law, dated June 17, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/ 

comments/sr-finra-2024-008/srfinra2024008- 

477251-1366154.html (‘‘St. John’s Letter I’’) at 2. 

FINRA agreed by filing Partial Amendment No. 1 

to modify proposed Rule 12800(g)(1)(B) to mirror 

the language in proposed Rule 12800(g)(1)(A) such 

that both provisions begin with ‘‘The Document 

Production Lists, described in Rule 12506 . . .’’. 

See Partial Amendment No. 1 and FINRA Response 

Letter at 2–3. 

31See FINRA Rule 12506(b)(1). 

32See letter from Elissa Germaine, Supervising 

Attorney, and Christine Lazaro, Supervising 

Attorney, Securities Arbitration Clinic of St. John’s 

University School of Law, dated September 17, 

2024, https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024- 

008/srfinra2024008-521575-1498402.pdf (‘‘St. 

John’s Letter II’’); letter from Jenice Malecki, 

Jacqueline Candella, Adam G. Schreck, and Claire 

Sterin, Intern, Malecki Law, dated September 17, 

2024, https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024- 

008/srfinra2024008-521595-1498462.pdf (‘‘Malecki 

Letter’’); letter from Joseph C. Peiffer, President, 

Public Investor Advocate Bar Association, dated 

September 17, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/ 

comments/sr-finra-2024-008/srfinra2024008- 

521555-1498322.pdf (‘‘PIABA Letter II’’); letter from 

William A. Jacobson, Clinical Professor of Law, 

Director of the Cornell Securities Law Clinic, Noah 

Moreano, Cornell Law Student, Cornell Securities 

Law Clinic, Cornell Law School, dated September 

16, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra2024-008/srfinra2024008-520935-1497242.pdf 

(‘‘Cornell Letter’’); letter from Nicole G. Iannarone, 

Associate Professor of Law, Drexel University 

School of Law, dated June 18, 2024, https://

www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024-008/ 

srfinra2024008-483631-1383094.pdf (‘‘Iannarone 

Letter’’); letter from Clare M. Farrelly, MBA, 

Student Intern, Fairbridge Investor Rights Clinic, 

Elisabeth Haub School of Law, Pace University, 

dated June 18, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/ 

comments/sr-finra-2024-008/srfinra2024008- 

483651-1383114.pdf (‘‘Pace Letter’’); letter from Jill 

I. Gross, Vice Dean for Academic Affairs and 

Professor of Law, Elisabeth Haub School of Law, 

Pace University, dated June 18, 2024, https://

www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024-008/ 

srfinra2024008-1382774.htm (‘‘Gross Letter’’); letter 

from Scott Eichhorn, Director, and Melanie S. 

Cherdack, Associate Director, Investor Rights 

Clinic, University of Miami School of Law, dated 

June 18, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/comments/srfinra-2024-008/srfinra2024008-483571-1382814.pdf 

(‘‘Miami Letter’’); letter from Joseph C. Peiffer, 

President, Public Investor Advocate Bar 

Association, dated June 18, 2024, https://

www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2024-008/ 

srfinra2024008-483331-1382594.pdf (‘‘PIABA Letter 

I’’); St. John’s Letter I; and letter from Steven B. 

Caruso, dated May 24, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/ 

comments/sr-finra-2024-008/srfinra2024008- 

477251-1366154.html (‘‘Caruso Letter’’). 

33See PIABA Letter I at 1. 

34See Gross Letter at 1. 

35See Pace Letter at 1. 

36 Id. at 2. 

37See Caruso Letter at 1; PIABA Letter I at 1–2; 

Pace Letter at 3; St. John’s Letter I at 1–2; Cornell 

Letter at 2, St. John’s Letter II at 1; and Malecki 

Letter at 2–3. 

38See Pace Letter at 3–4. 

39FINRA Response Letter at 3. 

agreement to extend any answer due 

date.25

If the customer does not timely elect 

to apply the Document Production Lists 

to all parties as provided, proposed Rule 

12800(g)(1)(B) would continue to permit 

an arbitrator to exercise discretion to 

use relevant portions of the Document 

Production Lists in a manner consistent 

with the expedited nature of simplified 

customer arbitrations. Additionally, 

proposed Rule 12800(g)(2) would 

continue to permit the parties to request 

documents and information from each 

other.26

III. Discussion of Commission Findings 

After careful review of the proposed 

rule change, the comment letters, and 

FINRA’s response to the comments, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the 

requirements of the Exchange Act and 

the rules and regulations thereunder 

that are applicable to a national 

securities association.27 Specifically, as 

explained in more detail below, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with Section 

15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act, which 

requires, among other things, that 

FINRA rules be designed to prevent 

fraudulent and manipulative acts and 

practices, to promote just and equitable 

principles of trade, and, in general, to 

protect investors and the public 

interest.28 The Commission addresses 

the proposed rule change’s specific 

provisions, and any related comments, 

in turn. 

Currently, the Document Production 

Lists do not apply in paper cases or in 

special proceedings. Accordingly, the 

parties in such proceedings must 

request documents and other 

information from each other, pursuant 

to FINRA Rule 12800(g)(2).29 The 

proposed rule change would amend 

FINRA Rule 12800(g)(1) to give 

customers in paper cases and special 

proceedings the option to elect at the 

time that they initiate an arbitration or, 

if they are a respondent, no later than 

the answer due date, whether they want 

the Document Production Lists to apply 

to all parties.30 If such an election is 

made, all parties would be required to 

produce the documents on the 

Document Production Lists, explain 

why the documents cannot be 

produced, or object to the production of 

the documents within the timeframes 

set forth in FINRA Rule 12506.31

Commenters supported the proposed 

rule change.32 For example, commenters 

stated that applying the Document 

Production Lists to paper cases and 

special proceedings would generally 

protect investors,33 enhance the fairness 

of the proceedings and arbitration 

process,34 balance the need for 

efficiency and fairness,35 and enhance 

fairness without unduly raising costs.36

In addition, multiple commenters stated 

that the proposed changes would 

enhance pro se customers’ awareness 

and understanding of the discovery 

process and support them in seeking 

material evidence necessary to their 

claims.37 Some commenters also 

suggested additional changes. 

One commenter suggested changes to 

proposed Rule 12800(g)(1)(B) to give a 

customer who is a respondent more 

time to request application of the 

Document Productions Lists. As 

proposed, if the customer is a 

respondent, he or she must request that 

the Document Production Lists apply no 

later than the date he or she must 

answer a statement of claim pursuant to 

Rule 12303, regardless of the parties’ 

agreement to extend any answer due 

date. The commenter suggested that 

when a customer respondent obtains an 

extension of time to answer, the 

customer should be allowed to opt in to 

the Document Production Lists when 

the customer files the answer pursuant 

to an agreed deadline extension, rather 

than on the original due date for the 

answer.38

In response, FINRA stated that the 

proposed rule change ‘‘balances the 

expedited nature of simplified customer 

arbitrations and the ability of customer 

respondents to make an informed 

decision regarding whether to use the 

Document Production Lists.’’ 39 For 

example, if a customer could request 

that the Document Production Lists 

apply when the customer respondent 

files the answer and the answer is not 

filed until just before the special 

proceeding hearing date, then ‘‘this 

would require the arbitrator and parties 

to reschedule the hearing date to a date 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
87438 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2024 / Notices 

40 Id. at 3–4. 

41See FINRA Response Letter at 4. 

42 Id.; see also Notice at 46211. 

43See FINRA Response Letter at 4; see also Notice 

at 46211. 

44See St. John’s Letter I at 2. 

45 Id. 

46Miami Letter at 3. 

47See FINRA Response Letter at 5–6. 

48 Id. at 6. 

49See FINRA Response Letter at 5. 

50 Id.; see also Notice at 46211. 

51See Miami Letter at 3–4. 

52 Id. 

53See FINRA Response Letter at 6. 

54 Id. (citing Arbitrator Training, https://

www.finra.org/arbitration-mediation/rules-caseresources/arbitrator-training (discussing how an 

arbitrator candidate must complete the 

comprehensive Basic Arbitrator Training Program 

to become eligible to serve on arbitration cases)). 

55 Id. (citing FINRA DRS Basic Arbitrator Training 

Program Transcript, p. 21, https://www.finra.org/ 

sites/default/files/2024-05/FINRA-Basic-Arbitratorand-Expungement-Training-Full-CourseTranscript.pdf). The training includes, among other 

things: (1) understanding the discovery process and 

timelines; (2) ruling on discovery requests based on 

the papers; and (3) imposing discovery sanctions 

when a party fails to provide sufficient information 

or documents. See id. 

56 Id. at 6. 

57See id. (citing FINRA DRS Chairperson 

Training Transcript, pp. 4–6, 9–15, 17–21, https:// 

www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2024-05/FINRA_

Chair-Training-Full-Transcript.pdf). 

58See id. at 6–7 (citing Arbitrator Training, 

https://www.finra.org/arbitration-mediation/rulescase-resources/arbitrator-training (discussing the 

Discovery, Abuses and Sanctions advanced training 

course for arbitrators)). FINRA stated that this 

course: (1) explains the Discovery Guide; (2) 

discusses the need for orders of confidentiality; (3) 

helps arbitrators recognize and address discovery 

abuses; and (4) reviews possible sanctions if they 

become necessary. See id. at 7. 

59See id. at 7. 

60See id. at 7–8 (citing FINRA DRS Arbitrator’s 

Guide, https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/ 

arbitrators-ref-guide.pdf). 

61FINRA Response Letter at 8. 

at least two months later than originally 

scheduled to allow parties adequate 

time to respond to the Document 

Production Lists.’’ 40 Similarly, allowing 

customer respondents to request that the 

Document Production Lists apply when 

filing the answer in a papers case rather 

than by the answer due date could 

significantly delay the conclusion of 

such cases, which are generally the most 

expedited form of arbitration case.41

Furthermore, FINRA stated that to the 

extent a customer respondent does not 

timely elect to apply the Document 

Production Lists to all parties, proposed 

Rule 12800(g)(1)(B) continues to allow 

the arbitrator discretion to use relevant 

portions of the Document Production 

Lists in a manner consistent with the 

expedited nature of simplified customer 

arbitrations.42 In addition, the parties 

can still request documents and 

information from each other pursuant to 

FINRA Rule 12800(g)(2).43 For these 

reasons, FINRA did not accept the 

suggested change. 

Another commenter suggested that 

FINRA add a hyperlink or cross 

reference to the Discovery Guide within 

the rules whenever the Document 

Production Lists are mentioned to help 

investors locate and use FINRA 

guidance.44 This commenter also 

suggested that FINRA make guidance on 

its website easier to locate for parties in 

simplified arbitrations.45 Another 

commenter recommended that FINRA 

provide parties a ‘‘plain language 

explanation of the discovery process 

and how it will differ with use of the 

Discovery Guide.’’ 46

In response to the commenters’ 

suggestions, FINRA: (1) updated the 

‘‘Related Links’’ section of the web 

pages for FINRA Rules 12506, 12507, 

12508, and 12800 to include a hyperlink 

to the Discovery Guide web page; 47 (2) 

updated the FINRA Rule 12800 web 

page by adding hyperlinks to any crossreferenced FINRA Rules; 48 and (3) 

updated its ‘‘Overview of Arbitration & 

Mediation’’ web page by adding a 

hyperlink to cross-reference its 

‘‘Simplified Arbitrations’’ web page.49

In addition, FINRA stated that it would 

develop and publish guidance about 

discovery that will be available to all 

parties in simplified arbitration and 

would, among other things, direct 

parties to the Discovery Guide.50

Finally, one commenter 

recommended providing and requiring 

more arbitrator training, including 

providing arbitrators greater discretion 

to award sanctions for discovery 

violations.51 Specifically, this 

commenter stated that enhanced 

training should provide arbitrators with 

sufficient detail on: (1) the requirements 

of parties when asserting objections; (2) 

the adequate bases for objections to 

overcome the presumption of 

discoverability; (3) how objections may 

lead to the risk that arbitrators do not 

have relevant documents and 

information to decide the case; and (4) 

the circumstances under which an 

arbitrator may award sanctions against 

parties who assert boilerplate 

objection.52

In response, FINRA stated that it 

currently provides mandatory training 

and various other resources to 

arbitrators regarding the discovery 

process.53 For example, arbitrators must 

pass FINRA’s Basic Arbitrator Training 

Program in order to serve on FINRA 

arbitration cases.54 The Basic Arbitrator 

Training Program includes a module 

dedicated to the discovery process.55

FINRA stated that this module also 

reminds arbitrators that pro se parties 

‘‘may need more procedural direction 

and specific deadlines for discovery 

requests and responses.’’ 56 Moreover, in 

order to qualify as a chairperson, 

arbitrators must complete training 

containing three modules with 

information about the discovery process 

and issues, including motions to compel 

discovery.57 In addition, DRS also offers 

voluntary, subject-specific training 

modules, including an online course 

titled ‘‘Discovery, Abuses and 

Sanctions’’ that focuses on the 

respective duties of arbitrators and 

parties in the discovery process.58

Further, FINRA stated that it also 

provides updates and reminders to 

arbitrators regarding discovery 

procedures via its Neutral Workshops 

and a quarterly newsletter,59 as well as 

the DRS Arbitrator’s Guide, which 

dedicates two sections to discovery and 

motions.60 FINRA stated that in light of 

these available resources, it ‘‘does not 

anticipate providing additional 

arbitrator training on the discovery 

process at this time.’’ 61

Giving customers in paper cases and 

special proceedings the option to elect 

whether they want the Document 

Production Lists to apply to all parties 

at the time that they initiate an 

arbitration or, if they are a respondent, 

no later than the answer due date, 

should increase the efficiency of 

simplified arbitration proceedings while 

maintaining their expedited nature. By 

opting to use the Document Production 

Lists, parties should receive those 

documents and information that are 

relevant to the dispute without the need 

to make production requests or engage 

in motion practice, which should help 

expedite the discovery process. 

Furthermore, increased access to 

relevant documents and other 

information should result in outcomes 

(i.e., awards and settlements) in paper 

cases or special proceedings that are 

more consistent with the merits of the 

case. 

In addition, the proposed rule change 

should help facilitate the discovery 

process in arbitration cases. Because 

many of the customers who appear in 

simplified arbitration cases are pro se, 

they are more likely than customers in 

regular arbitration cases to lack 

familiarity with the discovery process. 

Giving customers in paper cases and 

special proceedings the option to elect 

whether they want the Document 

Production Lists to apply to all parties 

is, therefore, a reasonable approach to 

facilitating the discovery process for 

customers. FINRA also reasonably 

determined to decline giving customer 

respondents more time to request 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2024 / Notices 87439 

62 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 

63 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

64 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Rule 1.5(n) (‘‘Member’’). The term 

‘‘Member’’ shall mean any registered broker or 

dealer that has been admitted to membership in the 

Exchange. A Member will have the status of a 

‘‘member’’ of the Exchange as that term is defined 

in Section 3(a)(3) of the Act. Membership may be 

granted to a sole proprietor, partnership, 

corporation, limited liability company or other 

organization which is a registered broker or dealer 

pursuant to Section 15 of the Act, and which has 

been approved by the Exchange. 

application of the Document 

Productions Lists. By requiring that a 

customer respondent request that the 

Document Production Lists apply no 

later than the answer due date pursuant 

to Rule 12303, rather than any extended 

answer due date agreed to by the 

parties, the proposed rule change 

reasonably balances providing 

respondent customers with time to 

determine whether to apply the 

Document Production Lists with the 

expeditious nature of simplified 

proceedings. 

Further, in addition to the proposed 

rule change, FINRA has taken, and has 

stated that it will continue to take, 

measures that should further enhance 

awareness and transparency of the 

discovery process, as well as help 

customers evaluate whether to request 

application of the Document Production 

Lists. Specifically, FINRA updated its 

website to provide more direct access to 

FINRA guidance and rules related to 

simplified arbitration and the discovery 

process, including the Document 

Production Lists. In addition, FINRA 

stated that it will publish guidance 

about discovery that would assist 

customers in making informed decisions 

regarding whether to elect to use the 

Document Production Lists in their 

case. Moreover, the educational 

resources currently available to 

arbitrators should help ensure that 

arbitrators are well trained on the 

discovery process, including use of the 

Discovery Production Lists, so that they 

can foster simplified arbitration 

proceedings that are less susceptible to 

unsupported procedural objections 

regarding document production and that 

operate in a fair and expeditious 

manner. For these reasons, the proposed 

rule change is reasonably designed to 

protect investors and the public interest. 

IV. Conclusion 

The proposed rule change would 

provide customers in paper cases and 

special proceedings the option to elect 

whether they want the Document 

Production Lists to apply to all parties. 

In this way, the proposed rule change 

would facilitate discovery of the 

documents and information that are 

relevant to a customer’s arbitration, and 

thereby enhance the arbitration process. 

The proposed rule change would also 

codify existing guidance stating that the 

Document Production Lists are 

applicable in simplified customer 

arbitrations in which the customer 

requests a regular hearing. Codifying 

this guidance would enhance parties’ 

awareness and understanding of the 

discovery process in certain simplified 

customer arbitrations. 

For the reasons set forth above, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

rule change, as modified by Partial 

Amendment No. 1, is consistent with 

Section 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act, 

which requires, among other things, that 

FINRA rules be designed to prevent 

fraudulent and manipulative acts and 

practices, promote just and equitable 

principles of trade, and, in general, 

protect investors and the public 

interest.62

It is therefore ordered pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act 63

that the proposed rule change (SR– 

FINRA–2024–008), as modified by 

Partial Amendment No. 1, be, and 

hereby is, approved. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.64

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25425 Filed 10–31–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–101453; File No. SR– 

CboeBZX–2024–103] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe 

BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing 

and Immediate Effectiveness of a 

Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its 

Fee Schedule 

October 28, 2024. 

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 

18, 2024, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘BZX’’) 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 BZX Exchange, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘BZX’’) proposes to 

amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the 

proposed rule change is provided in 

Exhibit 5. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is also available on the Exchange’s 

website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/ 

equities/regulation/rule_filings/BZX/), 

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 update its 

Fee Schedule to provide a temporary 

discount on fees assessed to BZX 

Members (‘‘Members’’) 3 and nonMembers that purchase $20,000 or more 

of ad hoc purchases of BZX Historical 

Depth Data (‘‘Historical Depth 

Reports’’), effective October 18, 2024 

through December 31, 2024. 

By way of background, the Exchange 

currently makes available for purchase 

Depth Data, which is a daily archive of 

the Exchange’s depth of book real-time 

feed, which provides depth-of-book 

quotations and execution information 

based on equity orders entered into the 

System. The Exchange also offers 

Historical Depth Data, which offers such 

data on a historical basis, i.e., T+1 or 

later. The Historical Depth Report is a 

completely voluntary product, in that 

the Exchange is not required by any rule 

or regulation to make this data available 

and that potential customers may 

purchase it on an ad-hoc basis only if 

they voluntarily choose to do so. 

Cboe LiveVol, LLC (‘‘LiveVol’’), a 

wholly owned subsidiary of the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES