16040 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Notices 

49See Amendment No. 2, supra note 6. 

50See id. 

51See id. 

52See id. 

53 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

54 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

55 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)(iii). 

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

execution price at all price levels when 

a single order is executed at multiple 

price levels; (3) updating the expiration 

date of the pilot program related to the 

suspension of certain provisions of the 

Proposed Rule to October 23, 2015 in 

connection with the Limit Up-Limit 

Down Plan and making clear that the 

Exchange would provide a publicly 

available assessment of the operation of 

this portion of the Proposed Rule by 

May 29, 2015; and (4) proposing an 

implementation date of May 8, 2015 to 

allow all the other options exchanges 

the time necessary to harmonize their 

rules with the Proposed Rule.49

The Commission believes 

Amendment No. 2 would provide 

market participants with additional 

clarity by making technical, nonsubstantive corrections to certain 

portions of the filing.50 The Commission 

believes the amendment to the 

determination of Theoretical Price when 

a single order is executed at multiple 

price levels is consistent with the 

protection of investors because the 

revised provision provides additional 

certainty to market participants and 

eliminates the discretion of the 

Exchange to determine Theoretical Price 

in certain circumstances.51 The 

Commission further believes that 

approval of the proposed rule change, as 

modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, 

on an accelerated basis would permit 

other options exchanges to complete the 

process of filing similar proposals to 

adopt the new, harmonized rule on a 

timely basis.52

As discussed above, the Commission 

believes that the revisions in 

Amendment No. 2 are being made to 

provide additional clarity to the 

proposed rule change and to provide 

additional certainty and consistency by 

eliminating the discretion of the 

Exchange to determine Theoretical Price 

in certain circumstances. The 

Commission believes Amendment No. 2 

is consistent with the purpose of the 

proposed rule change and is consistent 

with the protection of investors and the 

public interest. Accordingly, the 

Commission finds good cause, pursuant 

to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,53 to 

approve the proposed rule change, as 

modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, 

on an accelerated basis. 

VI. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,54 that the 

proposed rule change, as modified by 

Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 (SR–BATS– 

2014–067) be, and hereby is, approved 

on an accelerated basis. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.55

Brent J. Fields, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06890 Filed 3–25–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74560; File No. SR–CBOE– 

2015–031] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Chicago Board Options Exchange, 

Incorporated; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change Relating to the 

Solicitation Auction Mechanism 

March 20, 2015. 

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’), 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that, on March 

18, 2015, Chicago Board Options 

Exchange, Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ 

or ‘‘CBOE’’) 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 

Exchange filed the proposal as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ proposed rule change 

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of 

the Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 

thereunder.4 The Commission is 

publishing this notice to solicit 

comments on the proposed rule change 

from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Rules 6.74B and 24B.5B relating to the 

Solicitation Auction Mechanism 

(‘‘SAM’’). The text of the proposed rule 

change is provided below (additions are 

italicized; deletions are [bracketed]). 

* * * * * 

Chicago Board Options Exchange, 

Incorporated 

Rules 

* * * * * 

Rule 6.74B. Solicitation Auction 

Mechanism 

A Trading Permit Holder that 

represents agency orders may 

electronically execute orders it 

represents as agent (‘‘Agency Order’’) 

against solicited orders provided it 

submits the Agency Order for electronic 

execution into the solicitation auction 

mechanism (the ‘‘Auction’’) pursuant to 

this Rule. 

(a) Auction Eligibility Requirements. 

A Trading Permit Holder (the ‘‘Initiating 

Trading Permit Holder’’) may initiate an 

Auction provided all of the following 

are met: 

(1) The Agency Order is in a class 

designated as eligible for Auctions as 

determined by the Exchange and within 

the designated Auction order eligibility 

size parameters as such size parameters 

are determined by the Exchange 

(however, the eligible order size may 

not be less than 500 standard option 

contracts or 5,000 mini-option 

contracts); 

(2) Each order entered into the 

Auction shall be designated as all-ornone and must be stopped with a 

solicited order priced at or within the 

NBBO as of the time of the initiation of 

the Auction (i.e. the time that the 

Agency Order is received in the order 

handling system (‘‘OHS’’) (the ‘‘initial 

auction NBBO’’); and 

(3) The minimum price increment for 

an Initiating Trading Permit Holder’s 

single price submission shall be 

determined by the Exchange on a series 

basis and may not be smaller than one 

cent. 

(b) Auction Process. The Auction 

shall proceed as follows: 

(1) Auction Period and Requests for 

Responses. 

(A) To initiate the Auction, the 

Initiating Trading Permit Holder must 

mark the Agency Order for Auction 

processing, and specify a single price at 

which it seeks to cross the Agency 

Order with a solicited order priced at or 

within the initial auction NBBO. 

(B) When the Exchange receives a 

properly designated Agency Order for 

Auction processing, a Request for 

Responses message indicating the price, 

side, and size will be sent to all Trading 

Permit Holders that have elected to 

receive such messages. 

(C)–(G) No change. 

(2) Auction Conclusion and Order 

Allocation. The Auction shall conclude 

at the sooner of subparagraphs (b)(2)(A) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Notices 16041 

5See also Securities and Exchange Act Release 

No. 34–43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 (August 

4, 2000) (Order Approving Options Intermarket 

Linkage Plan) (File No. 4–429). 

6Neither SAM nor FLEX SAM functionality is 

currently activated for auctions on the Exchange. 

See RG14–076 (Deactivation of the Solicitation 

Auction Mechanism (SAM) (May 16, 2014)); see 

also notes 7 and 8, infra. 

7See also Rules 24B.5B(a)(2) and (b)(1)(i). 

8See also Rule 24B.5B(b)(3)(i)(A). 

9See Rule 6.74(b)(2)(A)(I); see also Rule 

24B.5B(b)(3)(i)(A). 

10Notably, the Exchange’s other auction rules 

expressly provide that Initiating TPHs must stop 

Agency Orders at or within the NBBO and prohibit 

Agency Orders from being executed against 

solicited orders at prices outside the NBBO. See 

Rule 6.74A(a)(3), (b)(1)(A), (b)(3)(D) (Automated 

Improvement Mechanism (‘‘AIM’’)). 

11SAM auction functionality has been 

deactivated since May 20, 2014. See RG14–076 

(Deactivation of the Solicitation Auction 

Mechanism (SAM) (May 16, 2014)). Prior to May 20, 

2014, SAM auction prices were checked against the 

BBO at the time that the Agency Order was received 

for auction processing in the OHS. 

12Consistent with these objectives, effective May 

20, 2014, the Exchange deactivated SAM. Any 

future reactivation of SAM will be announced via 

Regulatory Circular prior to reactivation. See RG14– 

076 (Deactivation of the Solicitation Auction 

Mechanism (SAM) (May 16, 2014)). 

through (F) of Rule 6.74A. At the 

conclusion of the Auction, the Agency 

Order will be automatically executed in 

full or cancelled and allocated subject to 

the following: 

(A) The Agency Order will be 

executed against the solicited order at 

the proposed execution price, provided 

that: 

(I) The execution price must be equal 

to or better than the initial auction 

NBBO. If the execution would take 

place outside the initial auction NBBO, 

the Agency Order and solicited order 

will be cancelled; 

(II)–(III) No change. 

. . . Interpretations and Policies: 

.01–.03 No change. 

* * * * * 

Rule 24B.5B. FLEX Solicitation Auction 

Mechanism 

A FLEX Trader that represents agency 

orders may electronically execute orders 

it represents as agent (‘‘Agency Order’’) 

against solicited orders provided it 

submits the Agency Order for electronic 

execution into the solicitation auction 

mechanism (the ‘‘SAM Auction’’) 

pursuant to this Rule. 

(a) No change. 

(b) SAM Auction Process. Only one 

SAM Auction may be ongoing at any 

given time in a series and SAM 

Auctions in the same series may not 

queue or overlap in any manner. In 

addition, unrelated FLEX Orders may 

not be submitted to the electronic book 

for the duration of a SAM Auction. The 

SAM Auction may not be cancelled and 

shall proceed as follows: 

(1) SAM Auction Period and Requests 

for Responses (‘‘RFR’’). 

(i) No change. 

(ii) When the Exchange receives a 

properly designated Agency Order for 

SAM Auction processing, an RFR 

message indicating the price, side and 

size will be sent to all FLEX Traders that 

have elected to receive such messages. 

(iii)–(vii) No change. 

(2)–(3) No change. 

* * * * * 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is also available on the Exchange’s Web 

site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/

CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.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 make 

changes to its existing SAM auction 

rules in Rule 6.74B and Flexible 

Exchange Option Solicitation Auction 

Mechanism (‘‘FLEX SAM’’) rules in 

Rule 24B.5B. The Exchange believes 

that the proposed amendments would 

ensure greater consistency between the 

Exchange’s SAM auction rules and 

Order Protection Rule 6.81 5 and 

provide additional clarity in the Rules 

regarding the Exchange’s SAM Auction 

procedures. 

Rules 6.74B and 24B.5B permit 

Trading Permit Holders (‘‘TPHs’’) and 

FLEX Traders to electronically execute 

an all-or-none (‘‘AON’’) orders for 500 

or more standard (or FLEX) options 

contracts or 5,000 or more mini-options 

contracts that they represent as agent 

(‘‘Agency Order’’) against solicited 

orders provided the TPH (or FLEX 

Trader) submits the Agency Order for 

electronic execution into SAM for 

auction (the ‘‘Auction’’) pursuant to 

Rule 6.74B or Rule 24B.5B (for FLEX 

orders).6 Under Rules 6.74B(a)(2) and 

(b)(1)(A), each order entered into SAM 

shall be designated AON by the 

Initiating TPH with the Agency Order 

marked for auction processing with a 

specific single price at which the 

Initiating TPH seeks to cross the Agency 

Order with the solicited order.7

Pursuant to Rule 6.74B(b)(2)(A)(I), the 

Agency Order will be executed against 

the solicited order at the proposed 

execution price, provided that, among 

other things, the execution price must 

be equal to or better than the CBOE best 

bid or offer (‘‘BBO’’).8 If the execution 

would take place outside the BBO, the 

Agency Order and solicited order will 

be cancelled.9

Although TPHs are subject to the 

Exchange’s Order Protection Rule 6.81 

and thus, prevented from trading 

through the displayed national best bid 

and offer (‘‘NBBO’’), including within 

the context of SAM auctions, Rule 6.74B 

does not specifically require Initiating 

TPHs to stop Agency Orders at or within 

the NBBO or expressly prohibit Agency 

Orders from being executed against 

solicited orders at prices outside the 

NBBO.10 In addition, current Rule 6.74B 

does not specify whether the Agency 

Order may be executed against a 

solicited order priced at or within the 

BBO as of the time that the Agency 

Order is received in the Exchange’s 

order handling system (‘‘OHS’’), as of 

the time of the beginning of the auction 

(i.e. the time when requests for 

responses (‘‘RFRs’’) are sent), or as of 

the time of execution.11 Accordingly, 

the Exchange is proposing to make 

several clarifying amendments to Rule 

6.74B to require that Agency Orders be 

stopped and executed at or within the 

NBBO and to define when the NBBO 

will be looked at for purposes of order 

protection during the SAM auction 

process.12

Specifically, the Exchange is 

proposing to amend Rules 6.74B(a)(2), 

6.74B(b)(1)(A), and 6.74B(b)(2)(A)(I) to 

provide that Agency Orders submitted 

into SAM must be stopped with a 

solicited order priced at or within the 

national best bid or offer (‘‘NBBO’’) as 

of the time of the initiation of the 

Auction (i.e. the time that the Agency 

Order is received for SAM auction 

processing in the OHS) (the ‘‘initial 

auction NBBO’’) and that Agency Orders 

that are submitted for electronic 

execution into SAM must be executed at 

a price at or better than the initial 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

16042 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Notices 

13The Exchange’s proposal to consider the NBBO 

as of the time that the Agency Order is received in 

the OHS for purposes of the entire auction period 

(i.e. 1 second) is consistent with the exception to 

the Exchange’s Order Protection Rule in Rule 

6.81(b)(8). 

14See id. 

15See Rule 6.74B(b)(1)(C); see also Rule 

24B.5B(b)(1)(iii). 

16The Exchange also notes that the proposed 

order protection rule changes are consistent with 

similar electronic price improvement auction rules 

of other exchanges. See, e.g., BOX Rule 7270(b)(2)(i) 

(Block Trades). 

17See Rule 6.74B(b)(2)(A). Note, however, that in 

this example, under both the current and proposed 

rules, had the resting order in the book to sell 50 

contracts at $1.20 been a Market-Maker quote or 

order rather than a public customer order, the 

Agency Order to buy 500 contracts would trade 

against the solicited order at $1.20 because there 

would not have been a public customer order in the 

book on the opposite side of the Agency Order and 

there would have been insufficient size to execute 

the Agency Order at a price equal to, or better than, 

the initial auction NBBO. See Rules 

6.74B(b)(2)(A)(II)–(III). 

18The Exchange’s other auction rules require the 

side of the Agency Order to be indicated in the RFR. 

See, e.g., Rule 6.74A(b)(1)(B), Automated 

Improvement Mechanism, which provides that the 

Initiating TPH must expressly disclose the side of 

the Agency Order that it seeks to cross. (‘‘When the 

Exchange receives a properly designated Agency 

Order for Auction processing, a Request for 

Responses (‘‘RFR’’) detailing the side and size of the 

order will be sent to all Trading Permit Holders that 

have elected to receive RFRs.’’ Emphasis added.) 

Although not expressly stated in the Rules, prior to 

May 20, 2014, the Exchange’s SAM RFR messages 

indicated the side of the Agency Order that the 

Initiating TPH sought to cross. 

19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

21 Id. 

auction NBBO.13 Agency Orders paired 

against solicited orders priced outside of 

the NBBO that are submitted for 

electronic execution into SAM would be 

rejected by the OHS and cancelled by 

the Exchange. 

The Exchange believes that requiring 

SAM orders to be stopped and executed 

at a price equal to, or better than, the 

NBBO as of the time of receipt of the 

Agency Order in the OHS is consistent 

with the Order Protection Rule 6.81. As 

proposed, the range of permissible 

crossing prices and executions would be 

defined based on a snapshot of the 

market at the time when the Agency 

Order is received.14 This proposed rule 

change would thus, make clear that 

although the NBBO may update during 

the SAM auction response time 

(currently SAM auctions last one 

second),15 the initial auction NBBO 

would be considered the NBBO for SAM 

auction execution purposes. 

Accordingly, a SAM order execution 

outside of the NBBO would not violate 

the Order Protection Rule if the 

execution price were within the NBBO 

that existed when the Agency Order was 

received in the OHS. The Exchange 

believes that the proposed rule changes 

would promote consistency within the 

Rules and across the Exchange’s various 

auction procedures.16 The Exchange 

also believes that the proposed rule 

changes would further the interests of 

investors and market participants by 

helping to ensure best executions and 

protection of bids and offers across 

multiple exchanges. 

The following example demonstrates 

how the Exchange’s proposal would 

provide an additional layer of order 

protection within the Rules. Assume 

that the NBBO for a particular option is 

$1.00–$1.20 with quotes on both sides 

for 100 contracts each. The CBOE BBO 

is $0.95–$1.25. An Initiating TPH 

submits an Agency Order to buy 500 

contracts against a solicited order to sell 

500 contracts into SAM priced at $1.21. 

An RFR is transmitted to TPHs that have 

elected to receive auction messages 

without any response. In this case, 

under current Rule 6.74B(b)(2)(A), the 

Agency Order would be executable 

against the solicited order because the 

execution price of $1.21 improves the 

CBOE best offer price of $1.25. Such 

execution, however, would be in 

violation of Rule 6.81 because the 

Agency Order would have been 

executed outside of the NBBO of $1.00– 

$1.20. The Exchange proposes to 

remedy this inconsistency in the Rules 

by changing references to the BBO to 

NBBO and defining the term ‘‘initial 

auction NBBO’’ to mean priced at or 

within the NBBO as of the time of the 

initiation of the Auction (i.e. the time 

that the Agency Order is received in the 

OHS). Under the Exchange’s proposal, 

the Agency Order would be rejected by 

the OHS and cancelled by the Exchange 

because, at the time when the Agency 

Order to buy 500 contracts priced at 

$1.21 was received in the OHS, the 

solicited would have been outside of the 

NBBO of $1.00–$1.20. 

The Exchange’s proposal would not, 

however, change the priority of public 

customer orders resting in the book. 

Assume again that the NBBO for a 

particular option is $1.00–$1.20 with 

quotes on both sides for 100 contracts 

each. Assume this time, however, that 

there is also a public customer order to 

sell 50 contracts resting in the book at 

$1.20. The CBOE BBO is $0.95–$1.20. 

An Initiating TPH submits an Agency 

Order to buy 500 contracts against a 

solicited order to sell 500 contracts into 

SAM priced at $1.20. An RFR is 

transmitted to TPHs that have elected to 

receive auction messages with a single 

response to sell 150 contracts also at 

$1.20. In this case, under both current 

Rule 6.74B(b)(2)(A) and the proposed 

rule changes, because there is a public 

customer order resting in the book on 

the opposite side of the Agency Order 

at the proposed price without sufficient 

size (considering all resting orders (i.e. 

50), electronic quotes (i.e. 100), and 

responses (i.e. 150) (50 + 100 + 150 = 

300)), both the Agency Order and 

solicited order would be cancelled.17

The Exchange also proposes to amend 

Rules 6.74B(b)(1)(B) and 24B.5B(b)(1)(ii) 

to further make clear that upon 

receiving a properly designated Agency 

Order for SAM or FLEX SAM Auction 

processing, the Exchange’s RFR message 

would indicate the price, side, and size 

of the Agency Order that the Initiating 

TPH is seeking to cross. Rules 

6.74B(b)(1)(B) and 24B.5B(b)(1)(ii) both 

currently provide that the Exchange will 

send an RFR message to all TPHs that 

have elected to receive such messages, 

indicating the price and size of the 

Agency Order that the Initiating TPH is 

seeking to cross, but neither Rule 

6.74B(b)(1)(B) or 24B.5B(b)(1)(ii) 

currently specify that the RFR will also 

indicate the side (i.e. buy v. sell) of the 

Agency Order that the Initiating TPH is 

seeking to cross.18 In order to add 

additional clarity to the Rules and in an 

effort to minimize confusion among 

market participants, the Exchange 

proposes to add the ‘‘side’’ indication 

requirement to the SAM auction rules. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed changes will provide 

additional clarity regarding the 

Exchange’s SAM auction processes and 

reduce the potential for confusion in the 

Rules. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the Act 

and the rules and regulations 

thereunder applicable to the Exchange 

and, in particular, the requirements of 

Section 6(b) of the Act.19 Specifically, 

the Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Section 

6(b)(5) 20 requirements that the rules of 

an exchange be designed to prevent 

fraudulent and manipulative acts and 

practices, to promote just and equitable 

principles of trade, to foster cooperation 

and coordination with persons engaged 

in regulating, clearing, settling, 

processing information with respect to, 

and facilitating transactions in 

securities, to remove impediments to 

and perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest. 

Additionally, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the Section 6(b)(5) 21 requirement that 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Notices 16043 

22See generally Securities and Exchange Act 

Release No. 34–43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 

(August 4, 2000) (Order Approving Options 

Intermarket Linkage Plan) (File No. 4–429). 

23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

24 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). As required under Rule 

19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the 

Commission with written notice of its intent to file 

the proposed rule change, along with a brief 

description and the text of 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. 25 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

the rules of an exchange not be designed 

to permit unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

In particular, the Exchange believes 

that the proposed changes would ensure 

further consistency within the 

Exchange’s Rules. The Exchange also 

believes that the proposed rule changes 

would further the objectives of the Act 

to protect investors by promoting the 

intermarket price protection goals of the 

Exchange’s Order Protection Rule 6.81 

and the Options Intermarket Linkage 

Plan.22 The Exchange believes its 

proposal would help ensure intermarket 

competition across all exchanges, aid in 

preventing intermarket trade-throughs, 

and facilitate compliance with best 

execution practices. The Exchange 

believes that these objectives are 

consistent with the Act and the rules 

and regulations thereunder applicable to 

the Exchange and, in particular, the 

requirements of Section 11A of the Act. 

In addition, the Exchange believes that 

the proposed rule changes will clarify 

the manner in which orders are 

submitted into the SAM auction process 

and reduce the potential for confusion 

in the Rules. The Exchange believes that 

providing additional clarity to its Rules 

furthers the goal of promoting 

transparency in markets, which is in the 

best interests of market participants and 

the general public and consistent with 

the Act. 

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. Rather, the 

Exchange believes that the proposed 

rule would bolster intermarket 

competition by promoting fair 

competition among individual markets, 

while at the same time assuring that 

market participants receive the benefits 

of markets that are linked together, 

through facilities and rules, in a unified 

system, which promotes interaction 

among the orders of buyers and sellers. 

The Exchange believes its proposal 

would help ensure intermarket 

competition across all exchanges, aid in 

preventing intermarket trade-throughs, 

and facilitate compliance with best 

execution practices. In addition, the 

Exchange believes that the proposed 

rule change would help promote fair 

and orderly markets by helping to 

ensure compliance with the Order 

Protection Rule. Thus, the Exchange 

does not believe the proposal creates 

any significant impact on competition. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange neither solicited nor 

received written comments on the 

proposed rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Because the foregoing proposed rule 

change does not (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) of the Act 23 and Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6) thereunder.24

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–2015–031 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–2015–031. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

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

available for Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 

10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change; 

the Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–CBOE– 

2015–031 and should be submitted on 

or before April 16, 2015. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.25

Brent J. Fields, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06893 Filed 3–25–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[File No. 500–1] 

In the Matter of Winsonic Digital Media 

Group, Ltd.; Order of Suspension of 

Trading Pursuant to Section 12(K) of 

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

March 24, 2015. 

It appears to the Securities and 

Exchange Commission that there is a 

lack of current and accurate information 

concerning the securities of Winsonic 

Digital Media Group, Ltd. (‘‘Winsonic’’) 

because it has not filed any periodic 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES