Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Notices 87921 

13See supra note 4. 

14See supra note 6. 

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

16 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give 

the Commission written notice of its intent to file 

the proposed rule change at least five business days 

prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule 

change, or such shorter time as designated by the 

Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 

requirement. 

17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

guarantee from a Clearing Member as 

specified in the membership 

requirements 13 and Options 6D, Section 

1.14 The Exchange notes that this rule 

would apply the same standards to 

Market Makers similar to ISE. 

The Exchange’s proposal to adopt a 

new rule titled, ‘‘Letters of Guarantee,’’ 

at Options 6, Section 4, does not impose 

an inter-market burden on competition 

because other options exchanges may 

adopt a similar rule. Today, ISE has 

substantively identical rule at Options 

6, Section 4. 

Options 6C 

The Exchange’s proposal to adopt a 

new rule titled, ‘‘Margin Required Is 

Minimum,’’ at Options 6C, Section 5 

does not impose an intra-market burden 

on competition because all member 

organizations would be subject to the 

proposed rule and the application of the 

rule would apply uniformly to all 

member based on the affected product. 

The proposed rule is substantively 

identical to BX and NOM Options 6C, 

Section 5. 

The Exchange’s proposal to adopt a 

new rule titled, ‘‘Margin Required Is 

Minimum,’’ at Options 6C, Section 5 

does not impose an inter-market burden 

on competition because other options 

exchanges may adopt a similar rule. 

Today, BX and NOM have a 

substantively identical rule at Options 

6C, Section 5. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were either 

solicited or received. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Because the foregoing proposed rule 

change does not: (i) significantly affect 

the protection of investors or the public 

interest; (ii) impose any significant 

burden on competition; and (iii) become 

operative for 30 days from the date on 

which it was filed, or such shorter time 

as the Commission may designate, it has 

become effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 15 and 

subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b–4 

thereunder.16

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 shall institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

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 (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

Phlx–2024–56 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–Phlx–2024–56. 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 (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for 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 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–Phlx–2024–56 and should be 

submitted on or before November 26, 

2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.17

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25638 Filed 11–4–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–101480; File No. SR–BOX– 

2024–25] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX 

Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend the Fee 

Schedule for Trading on the BOX 

Options Market LLC Facility (‘‘BOX’’) 

October 30, 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 

15, 2024, BOX Exchange LLC (the 

‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I, II, and 

III, below, which Items have been 

prepared by the Exchange. The 

Exchange filed the proposed rule change 

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the 

Act,3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4

which renders the proposal effective 

upon filing with the Commission. 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 is filing with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change 

to amend the Fee Schedule to assess a 

$0.00 Complex Surcharge for certain 

Complex Order transactions on the BOX 

Options Market LLC (‘‘BOX’’) options 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
87922 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Notices 

5See BOX Fee Schedule Section VI.A (All 

Complex Orders). 

6For purposes of the Exchange Fee Schedule, the 

term ‘‘affiliate’’ of a Participant shall mean any 

Participant under 75% common ownership or 

control of that Participant. An ‘‘Appointed OFP’’ is 

an OFP that has been designated by a BOX Market 

Maker. See BOX Fee Schedule Section IX.A 

(Aggregate Billing). 

7A $0.50 fee plus the $0.12 Complex Surcharge. 

8See Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘Nasdaq ISE’’) Rules 

Options 7, Section 4, footnote 3 (Taker Fee 

discounted from $0.50 to $0.38 per contract when 

executed against Priority Customer Complex Orders 

in Select Symbols entered by an Affiliated Member 

or Affiliated Entity, excluding Complex Orders 

executed in the Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited 

Order Mechanism, and Price Improvement 

Mechanism). The Exchange believes that Nasdaq 

ISE’s taker fee discount structure is similar to the 

proposal in that it applies to a subset of symbols 

entered by affiliated or assigned firms. The 

Exchange notes that while ISE offers a discounted 

fee, the Exchange is proposing to not apply a 

surcharge, which similarly results in a decreased 

fee. 

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5). 

10See supra note 8. 

11The Nasdaq ISE Options Pricing Schedule 

defines ‘‘Select Symbols’’ as options overlying all 

symbols listed on the Nasdaq ISE that are in the 

Penny Interval Program. See Nasdaq ISE Rules 

Options 7, Section 1(c). 

12The Nasdaq ISE Options Pricing Schedule 

provides that a ‘‘Priority Customer’’ is a person or 

entity that is not a broker/dealer in securities, and 

does not place more than 390 orders in listed 

options per day on average during a calendar month 

for its own beneficial account(s), as defined in 

Nasdaq ISE Options 1, Section 1(a)(37). See Nasdaq 

ISE Rules Options 7, Section 1(c). 

13The Nasdaq ISE Options Pricing Schedule 

defines a ‘‘Complex Order’’ as any order involving 

the simultaneous purchase and/or sale of two or 

more different options series in the same 

underlying security, as provided in Nasdaq ISE 

Options 3, Section 14, as well as Stock-Option 

Orders. See Nasdaq ISE Rules Options 7, Section 

1(c). 

14The Nasdaq ISE Options Pricing Schedule 

defines an ‘‘Affiliated Member’’ as a Member that 

shares at least 75% common ownership with a 

particular Member as reflected on the Member’s 

Form BD, Schedule A. See Nasdaq ISE Rules 

Options 7, Section 1(c). 

15The Nasdaq ISE Options Pricing Schedule 

provides that an ‘‘Affiliated Entity’’ is a relationship 

between an Appointed Market Maker and an 

Appointed OFP for purposes of qualifying for 

certain pricing specified in the Schedule of Fees. 

See Nasdaq ISE Rules Options 7, Section 1(c). 

16See supra note 8. The Exchange further notes 

that it is proposing to not apply the Complex 

Surcharge to transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM, 

while the Nasdaq ISE discount is applicable to all 

options within their Penny Interval Program. 

facility. The text of the proposed rule 

change is available from the principal 

office of the Exchange, at the 

Commission’s Public Reference Room 

and also on the Exchange’s internet 

website at https://

rules.boxexchange.com/rulefilings. 

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 trading on BOX to 

assess a $0.00 Complex Surcharge for 

certain Complex Order transactions. 

Currently, BOX assesses a Complex 

Surcharge of $0.12 per contract to any 

electronic non-Public Customer 

Complex Order that executes against an 

electronic Public Customer Complex 

Order.5

The Exchange now proposes that a 

$0.00 per contract Complex Surcharge 

will be applied for transactions in SPY, 

QQQ, and IWM when the Public 

Customer Complex Order is entered by 

an affiliate or Appointed OFP.6 Section 

VI.A. of the Fee Schedule currently 

provides, in relevant part, ‘‘A $0.12 per 

contract Complex Surcharge will be 

applied to any electronic non-Public 

Customer Complex Order that executes 

against an electronic Public Customer 

Complex Order.’’ The Exchange now 

proposes to add text to Section VI.A. 

providing, ‘‘The Complex Surcharge 

will not be applied for transactions in 

SPY, QQQ, and IWM when the Public 

Customer Complex Order is entered by 

an affiliate or Appointed OFP.’’ 

For example, currently, if a Public 

Customer submitted a SPY order to the 

Complex Order Book (making liquidity) 

that interacted with a Market Maker’s 

SPY order (taking liquidity), the Market 

Maker would be charged $0.62.7 Under 

the proposal, if the Public Customer 

SPY order was entered by an affiliate or 

Appointed OFP of the Market Maker, 

then the Market Maker would only be 

charged the taker fee of $0.50 and not 

the $0.12 Complex Surcharge. The 

proposed change would effectively 

decrease the Complex Surcharge 

assessed in this case from $0.12 to 

$0.00. 

The Exchange does not believe that 

the proposed rule change is novel as a 

similar discount structure currently 

exists at another exchange.8 Further, the 

Exchange believes that the proposal will 

encourage Participants to send 

increased SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

Complex Order flow to BOX because 

this proposal will decrease the cost of 

certain transactions. Specifically, 

Participants with an affiliate or an 

Appointed OFP will not be assessed the 

Complex Surcharge for transactions in 

SPY, QQQ, and IWM when the Public 

Customer Complex Order that they trade 

with is entered by their affiliate or 

Appointed OFP. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposal is consistent with the 

requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, 

in general, and Section 6(b)(4) and 

6(b)(5) of the Act,9 in particular, in that 

it provides for the equitable allocation 

of reasonable dues, fees, and other 

charges among BOX Participants and 

other persons using its facilities and 

does not unfairly discriminate between 

customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. 

Specifically, the Exchange’s proposal to 

not apply the Complex Surcharge for 

transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

when the Public Customer Complex 

Order is entered by an affiliate or 

Appointed OFP is reasonable because 

this discount will incentivize BOX 

Participants to send their SPY, IWM, 

and QQQ order flow to BOX which 

would increase Complex Order liquidity 

and benefit all market participants 

(including those market participants 

that are not currently affiliates and/or 

opt not to become an Appointed OFP) 

by providing more trading opportunities 

and tighter spreads in SPY, QQQ, and 

IWM. 

The Exchange believes that this 

proposal is reasonable, equitable, and 

not unfairly discriminatory as it is 

consistent with the discount structure at 

another exchange.10 Specifically, ISE 

currently provides a taker fee discount 

in Select Symbols 11 when entered 

against Priority Customer 12 Complex 

Orders 13 by an Affiliated Member 14 or 

Affiliated Entity.15 The Exchange 

believes that its proposal is similar to 

the discount structure in place at 

Nasdaq ISE in that it is proposing to 

apply a Complex Surcharge of $0.00 (an 

effective $0.12 discount) to certain 

transactions in a subset of symbols 

when the Public Customer Complex 

Order is entered by an affiliate or 

Appointed OFP.16

The Exchange further believes that 

this proposal is reasonable, equitable, 

and not unfairly discriminatory because 

all non-Public Customers would not be 

assessed a Complex Surcharge for 

transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

when executing against a Public 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Notices 87923 

17See BOX Fee Schedule Sections IV.A 

(Electronic Transaction Fees) and VI (Complex 

Order Transaction Fees). 

18See e.g., Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. Options Fee 

Schedule (‘‘Transaction Fees’’ applicable to SPY, 

QQQ, and IWM among 9 other symbols); MIAX 

PEARL, LLC Options Fee Schedule (‘‘Transaction 

Rebates/Fees’’ for Priority Customer SPY, QQQ, and 

IWM Taker). 

19See https://www.optionseducation.org/ 

toolsoptionquotes/today-s-most-active-options 

(providing a daily list of the most active options by 

type). 

Customer Complex Order that was 

entered by an affiliate or Appointed 

OFP. Additionally, the criteria for not 

applying the Complex Surcharge for 

transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

that execute against Public Customer 

Complex Orders that were entered by an 

affiliate or Appointed OFP would be 

uniformly applied for all Participants. 

The Exchange also believes that 

offering Participants the opportunity to 

not be assessed the Complex Surcharge 

for transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

when they execute against Public 

Customer Complex Orders that were 

entered by an affiliate or Appointed 

OFP is equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory as it relates to 

Participants who are not affiliates or 

Appointed OFPs because any 

Participant may enter into such a 

relationship for the purpose of 

aggregating volume executed on the 

Exchange. 

The Exchange believes further that 

discounting the Complex Surcharge 

when the Public Customer Complex 

Order is entered by an affiliate or 

Appointed OFP is reasonable because 

the discount is designed to increase 

SPY, QQQ, and IWM order flow to BOX, 

which would benefit all market 

participants. 

The Exchange believes its proposal to 

establish different pricing for SPY, 

QQQ, and IWM Complex Order in this 

case is reasonable, equitable, and not 

unfairly discriminatory because pricing 

by symbol is a common practice on 

many U.S. options exchanges as a 

means to incentivize order flow to be 

sent to an exchange for execution in the 

most actively traded options classes. 

The Exchange notes that separate fees 

and rebates for SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

and currently assessed for non-auction 

electronic transactions and Complex 

Orders.17 The Exchange notes further 

that other exchanges design fee 

structures to compete specifically for 

volume in these (and other high 

volume) symbols.18 SPY, QQQ, and 

IWM are among the most actively traded 

options 19 and therefore the Exchange 

believes that not assessing the Complex 

Surcharge on qualifying Complex 

Orders for these classes is appropriate to 

more effectively attract order flow to 

BOX. The Exchange further believes that 

assessing different pricing for SPY, QQQ 

and IWM, as compared to other 

symbols, is reasonable because SPY, 

QQQ and IWM are highly liquid 

symbols, have higher volumes, and 

other exchanges design fee structures to 

specifically compete for executions in 

these symbols. The Exchange believes 

that creating a separate category within 

the fee structure for these classes is 

appropriate to more effectively attract 

order flow to BOX in these classes. 

The Exchange believes the proposal 

will create an incentive for Participants 

to bring Complex Orders in SPY, QQQ, 

and IWM to BOX. The Exchange 

believes that if the proposed incentive is 

effective, then an ensuing increase in 

trading activity on BOX will improve 

the quality of the market to the benefit 

of all market participants. Further, to 

the extent this proposal attracts new 

Participant volume to BOX, all market 

participants will benefit through 

increased liquidity and more trading 

opportunities. 

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 not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. 

The proposal does not impose an 

undue burden on intermarket 

competition. The Exchange believes its 

proposal remains competitive with 

other options markets and will offer 

market participants with another choice 

of where to transact its business. The 

Exchange notes that it operates in a 

highly competitive market in which 

market participants can readily favor 

competing venues if they deem fee 

levels at a particular venue to be 

excessive, or rebate opportunities 

available at other venues to be more 

favorable. In such an environment, the 

Exchange must continually adjust its 

fees and rebates to remain competitive 

with other exchanges. Because 

competitors are free to modify their own 

fees and rebates in response, and 

because market participants may readily 

adjust their order routing practices, the 

Exchange believes that the degree to 

which fee changes in this market may 

impose any burden on competition is 

extremely limited. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed discount will encourage 

market participants to send greater 

amounts of Complex Orders in SPY, 

QQQ, and IWM to BOX for execution in 

order to take advantage of the proposed 

discount and lower their costs. The 

Exchange believes that the additional 

liquidity in SPY, QQQ, and IWM will 

enhance the quality of BOX’s Complex 

Order market and increase related 

trading opportunities on BOX. 

Accordingly, the Exchange believes that 

the proposed changes may increase 

intermarket and intra-market 

competition by incentivizing 

Participants to direct their SPY, QQQ, 

and IWM orders to the Exchange, 

thereby increasing the volume of 

contracts traded on BOX and enhancing 

the quality of the market in these 

classes. Enhanced market quality and 

increased transaction volume that result 

from the anticipated increase in SPY, 

QQQ, and IWM order flow directed to 

BOX would benefit all market 

participants and improve competition 

on BOX in SPY, QQQ, and IWM. 

The Exchange further believes that its 

proposal will not place any category of 

market participant at a competitive 

disadvantage and therefore does not 

impose an undue burden on intramarket competition because all nonPublic Customers would be assessed a 

Complex Surcharge of $0.00 for 

transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

when executing against a Public 

Customer Complex Order that was 

entered by an affiliate or Appointed 

OFP. Additionally, the criteria for 

applying a Complex Surcharge of $0.00 

for transactions in SPY, QQQ, and IWM 

that execute against Public Customer 

Complex Orders that were entered by an 

affiliate or Appointed OFP would be 

uniformly applied for all Participants. 

Additionally, offering Participants the 

opportunity to not be assessed the 

Complex Surcharge for transactions in 

SPY, QQQ, and IWM that execute 

against Public Customer Complex 

Orders that were entered by an affiliate 

or Appointed OFP does not impose an 

undue burden on competition as it 

relates to Participants who are not 

affiliates or Appointed OFPs because 

any Participant may enter into such a 

relationship for the purpose of 

aggregating volume executed on BOX . 

Finally, the criteria for assessing a 

Complex Surcharge of $0.00 would be 

uniformly applied to all Participants. 

The Exchange again notes that it 

operates in a highly competitive market 

in which market participants can 

readily favor competing venues. In such 

an environment, the Exchange must 

continually review, and consider 

adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain 

competitive with other exchanges. For 

the reasons discussed above, the 

Exchange believes that the proposed 

change reflects this competitive 

environment. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
87924 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Notices 

20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 

21 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 

3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

5 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

6 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 

7See IEX Rule 1.160(nn). 

8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 101018 

(September 12, 2024), 89 FR 76526 (September 18, 

2024) (SR–IEX–2024–17) (‘‘Data Center Migration 

Filing’’). 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were either 

solicited or received. 

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)(ii) of the Exchange Act 20

and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,21

because it establishes or changes a due, 

or fee. 

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of the proposed rule change, the 

Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend the rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that the 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or would otherwise further 

the purposes of the Act. If the 

Commission takes such action, the 

Commission shall institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

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 (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

BOX–2024–25 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–BOX–2024–25. 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 (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for 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 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–BOX–2024–25 and should be 

submitted on or before November 26, 

2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division 

of Trading and Markets, pursuant to 

delegated authority.22

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25636 Filed 11–4–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–101481; File No. SR–IEX– 

2024–22] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Modify the 

Implementation Timeline for Its 

Planned Data Center Migration, Which 

Was Set Forth in a Recent Rule Filing 

October 30, 2024 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3

notice is hereby given that on October 

16, 2024, the Investors Exchange LLC 

(‘‘IEX’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I and II 

below, which Items have been prepared 

by the self-regulatory organization. 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 

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 

19(b)(1) under the Act,4 and Rule 19b– 

4 thereunder,5 the Exchange is filing 

with the Commission a proposal to 

modify the implementation timeline for 

its planned data center migration, which 

was set forth in a recent rule filing. The 

Exchange has designated this proposal 

as non-controversial and is requesting a 

waiver of the notice required by Rule 

19b–4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.6

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available at the Exchange’s website at 

www.iextrading.com, at the principal 

office of the Exchange, and at the 

Commission’s Public Reference Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and the 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

self-regulatory organization 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 self-regulatory organization 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 the 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

On September 4, 2024, in connection 

with IEX’s planned migration of its 

System 7 from a data center located in 

Weehawken, New Jersey to a data center 

located in Secaucus, New Jersey, IEX 

filed with the Commission an 

immediately effective proposed rule 

change.8 The Data Center Migration 

Filing provided that IEX would 

implement the data center migration 

through a phased approach over several 

weeks. The Data Center Migration Filing 

amended IEX Rules 11.190 and 11.510 

to remove references to the latency 

applicable to outbound communications 

from IEX’s System (‘‘outbound latency’’) 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1