37364 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Notices 

28 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 

29 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 30 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Fee Schedule, Section 5(d)(ii), footnote 30. 

serve to reduce demand for the 

Exchange’s data product, which as 

discussed, market participants are under 

no obligation to utilize. In this 

competitive environment, potential 

purchasers are free to choose which, if 

any, similar product to purchase to 

satisfy their need for market 

information. As a result, the Exchange 

believes this proposed rule change 

permits fair competition among national 

securities exchanges. 

The Exchange also does not believe 

the proposed fees would cause any 

unnecessary or inappropriate burden on 

intermarket competition as other 

exchanges are free to introduce their 

own comparable data product and lower 

their prices to better compete with the 

Exchange’s offering. The Exchange does 

not believe the proposed rule change 

would cause any unnecessary or 

inappropriate burden on intramarket 

competition. Particularly, the proposed 

product and fees apply uniformly to any 

purchaser, in that it does not 

differentiate between subscribers that 

purchase cToM. The proposed fees are 

set at a modest level that would allow 

any interested Member or non-Member 

to purchase such data based on their 

business needs. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

Written comments were neither 

solicited nor 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 Act,28 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(2) 29 thereunder. At any time 

within 60 days of the filing of the 

proposed rule change, the Commission 

summarily may temporarily suspend 

such rule change if it appears to the 

Commission that such action is 

necessary or appropriate in the public 

interest, for the protection of investors, 

or otherwise in furtherance of the 

purposes of the Act. If the Commission 

takes such action, the Commission 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 (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

EMERALD–2021–21 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–EMERALD–2021–21. This 

file number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

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

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 

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

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change. 

Persons submitting comments are 

cautioned that we do not redact or edit 

personal identifying information from 

comment submissions. You should 

submit only information that you wish 

to make available publicly. All 

submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–EMERALD–2021–21, and 

should be submitted on or before 

August 5, 2021. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.30

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15030 Filed 7–14–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–92364; File No. SR–MIAX– 

2021–29] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami 

International Securities Exchange LLC; 

Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule 

Change To Amend Fees for Purge 

Ports 

July 9, 2021. 

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 July 1, 

2021, Miami International Securities 

Exchange LLC (‘‘MIAX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) 

filed with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) a 

proposed rule change as described in 

Items I, II, and III below, which Items 

have been prepared by the Exchange. 

The Commission is publishing this 

notice to solicit comments on the 

proposed rule change from interested 

persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange is filing a proposal to 

amend the MIAX Options Fee Schedule 

(the ‘‘Fee Schedule’’) to amend the 

MIAX Options Fee Schedule (the ‘‘Fee 

Schedule’’) to amend the fees for Purge 

Ports.3

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s website at 

http://www.miaxoptions.com/rulefilings, at MIAX’s principal office, and 

at the Commission’s Public Reference 

Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

Exchange included statements 

concerning the purpose of and basis for 

the proposed rule change and discussed 

any comments it received on the 

proposed rule change. The text of these 

statements may be examined at the 

places specified in Item IV below. The 

Exchange has prepared summaries, set 

forth in sections A, B, and C below, of 

the most significant aspects of such 

statements. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Notices 37365 

4The term ‘‘Market Makers’’ refers to Lead Market 

Makers (‘‘LMMs’’), Primary Lead Market Makers 

(‘‘PLMMs’’), and Registered Market Makers 

(‘‘RMMs’’) collectively. See Exchange Rule 100. 

5The term ‘‘System’’ means the automated 

trading system used by the Exchange for the trading 

of securities. See Exchange Rule 100. 

6See Cboe BXZ Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BZX’’) Options 

Fee Schedule, Options Logical Port Fees, Purge 

Ports ($750 per purge port per month); Cboe EDGX 

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’) Options Fee Schedule, 

Options Logical Port Fees, Purge Ports ($750 per 

purge port per month); Cboe Exchange, Inc. 

(‘‘Cboe’’) Fee Schedule ($850 per purge port per 

month). In Cboe’s Purge Ports Frequently Asked 

Questions, Cboe recommends that at least two 

purge ports be obtained per exchange for 

redundancy purposes. See https://cdn.cboe.com/ 

resources/features/Cboe_USO_PurgePortsFAQs.pdf. 

See also Nasdaq GEMX, Options 7, Pricing 

Schedule, Section 6.C.(3). Nasdaq GEMX, LLC 

(‘‘Nasdaq GEMX’’) assesses its members $1,250 per 

SQF Purge Port per month, subject to a monthly cap 

of $17,500 for SQF Purge Ports and SQF Ports, 

applicable to market makers. 

7A ‘‘matching engine’’ is a part of the MIAX 

electronic system that processes options quotes and 

trades on a symbol-by-symbol basis. Some matching 

engines will process option classes with multiple 

root symbols, and other matching engines will be 

dedicated to one single option root symbol. A 

particular root symbol may only be assigned to a 

single designated matching engine. A particular 

root symbol may not be assigned to multiple 

matching engines. See Fee Schedule, Section 

5(d)(ii), note 29. 

8Full Service MEI Ports provide Market Makers 

with the ability to send Market Maker quotes, 

eQuotes, and quote purge messages to the MIAX 

System. Full Service MEI Ports are also capable of 

receiving administrative information. Market 

Makers are limited to two Full Service MEI Ports 

per matching engine. See Fee Schedule, Section 

5(d)(ii), note 27. 

9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81252 

(July 28, 2017), 82 FR 36172 (August 3, 2017) (SR– 

MIAX–2017–36). 

10See supra note 6. 

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

14See supra note 9. 

15See supra note 6. Cboe further recommends 

that at least two purge ports be obtained per 

exchange for redundancy purposes. See https://

cdn.cboe.com/resources/features/Cboe_USO_

PurgePortsFAQs.pdf. This guidance applies to 

Cboe’s affiliate exchanges, BZX and EDGX. 

16See supra note 6. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange currently provides 

Market Makers 4 the option to purchase 

Purge Ports to assist in their quoting 

activity. Purge Ports provide Market 

Makers with the ability to send quote 

purge messages to the MIAX System.5

Purge Ports are not capable of sending 

or receiving any other type of messages 

or information. The use of Purge Ports 

is completely optional and no rule or 

regulation requires that a Market Maker 

utilize them. 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

monthly fee for Purge Ports under 

Section 5(d)(ii) of the Fee Schedule. 

Unlike other options exchanges that 

provide purge port functionality and 

charge fees on a per port basis,6 the 

Exchange offers Purge Ports as a package 

and provides Market Makers with the 

option to receive up to two (2) Purge 

Ports per matching engine 7 to which it 

connects via a Full Service MEI Port.8

The Exchange currently has twenty-four 

(24) matching engines which means 

Market Makers may receive up to fortyeight (48) Purge Ports for a single 

monthly fee. The Exchange currently 

assesses Market Makers a fee of $1,500 

per month, regardless of the number of 

Purge Ports allocated to the Market 

Maker. Assuming a Market Maker 

connects to all twenty-four (24) 

matching engines during a month, with 

two Purge Ports per matching engine, 

this results in a cost of $31.25 per Purge 

Port ($1,500 divided by 48) for the 

month. This fee has been unchanged 

since the Exchange introduced Purge 

Ports in 2017.9 The Exchange now 

proposes to increase the fee to $7,500 

per month. Market Makers will continue 

to receive two (2) Purge Ports to each 

matching engine to which they are 

connected for the single flat monthly 

fee. Assuming a Market Maker connects 

to all twenty-four (24) matching engines 

during the month, with two Purge Ports 

per matching engine, this would result 

in a cost of $156.25 per Purge Port 

($7,500 divided by 48). 

The Exchange has historically 

undercharged for Purge Port as 

compared to other options exchanges 10

because the Exchange provides Purge 

Ports as a package for a single monthly 

fee. As described above, this package 

includes two Purge Ports for each of the 

Exchange’s twenty-four (24) matching 

engines. The Exchange understands 

other options exchanges charge fees on 

a per port basis. The proposed monthly 

fee increase for Purge Ports would bring 

the Exchange’s fees more in line with 

that of other options exchanges, while 

maintaining a competitive fee structure 

for Purge Port. 

Implementation Date 

The proposed fee changes will 

become effective on July 1, 2021. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is 

consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 11

in general, and furthers the objectives of 

Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 12 in 

particular, in that it provides for the 

equitable allocation of reasonable dues, 

fees and other charges among Exchange 

Members and issuers and other persons 

using any facility or system which the 

Exchange operates or controls. The 

Exchange also believes the proposal 

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

of the Act 13 in that it is designed to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, to remove impediments to and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general to protect 

investors and the public interest and is 

not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers and dealers. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed fees are reasonable, equitably 

allocated and not unfairly 

discriminatory because, for the flat fee, 

the Exchange provides each Market 

Maker two Purge Ports for each 

matching engine to which that Market 

Maker is connected. The Exchange 

currently has twenty-four (24) matching 

engines. Accordingly, each Market 

Maker that is connected to all twentyfour (24) matching engines receives a 

total of forty-eight (48) Purge Ports for 

the existing flat fee of $1,500 per month. 

On a per Purge Port basis, that equals 

$31.25 per Purge Port ($1,500 divided 

by 48). This flat fee has remain 

unchanged since the Exchange 

introduced Purge Ports in 2017.14 The 

Exchange believes that increasing the 

flat monthly fee for Purge Port 

(regardless of the number of matching 

engines to which it connects and 

consequently regardless of the number 

of Purge Ports allocated to the Market 

Maker) is equitable, reasonable, and 

competitive with the fees charged by 

other exchanges that offer comparable 

purge port services. The Exchange 

believes that most such exchanges 

charge per port for each match engine. 

For example, BXZ charges a monthly fee 

of $750 per purge port per month, EDGX 

charges a monthly fee of $750 per purge 

port, Cboe charges a monthly fee of $850 

per purge port,15 and Nasdaq GEMX 

assesses its members $1,250 per SQF 

Purge Port per month.16 When 

calculated on a per purge port basis, 

each of the above exchanges charge 

monthly per purge port fees that are 

higher than the proposed $7,500 per 

month ($156.25 per Purge Port). 

The Exchange operates in a highly 

competitive environment. Indeed, there 

are currently 16 registered options 

exchanges that trade options. Based on 

publicly available information, no single 

options exchange has more than 15% of 

the market share and currently the 

Exchange represents only approximately 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
37366 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Notices 

17See MIAX’s ‘‘The Market at a Glance’’, 

available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/ (last 

visited June 30, 2021). 

18See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) 

(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’). 

19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

20See supra note 6. 

21See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91033 

(February 1, 2021), 86 FR 8455 (February 5, 2021) 

(SR–EMERALD–2021–03). 

6.76% of the market share.17 The 

Commission has repeatedly expressed 

its preference for competition over 

regulatory intervention in determining 

prices, products, and services in the 

securities markets. Particularly, in 

Regulation NMS, the Commission 

highlighted the importance of market 

forces in determining prices and SRO 

revenues and, also, recognized that 

current regulation of the market system 

‘‘has been remarkably successful in 

promoting market competition in its 

broader forms that are most important to 

investors and listed companies.’’ 18 The 

Exchange is not aware of any evidence 

that a market share of approximately 6– 

7% provides the Exchange with anticompetitive pricing power. If the 

Exchange were to attempt to establish 

unreasonable pricing, then no market 

participant would purchase Purge Ports, 

and existing market participants would 

cease paying for Purge Ports, which are 

optional services offered by the 

Exchange. The Exchange believes that 

the proposed rule change is consistent 

with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,19 in that 

it provides for the equitable allocation 

of reasonable dues, fees and other 

charges among Members and other 

persons using any facility or system 

which the Exchange operates or controls 

because Purge Ports are optional 

functionality offered to Market Makers. 

The Exchange further believes the 

proposed fees are reasonable as the 

Exchange believes that the proposed 

fees are lower on a per port basis than 

the fees assessed by other exchanges 

that provide similar functionality.20

Indeed, if the Exchange’s proposed fees 

that are excessively higher than 

established fees for similar services on 

other exchanges, then the proposed fees 

would simply serve to reduce demand 

for the Exchange’s services, which as 

noted, is entirely optional. The 

Exchange notes that Market Makers are 

not required by rule or regulation to 

purchase Purge Ports. It is entirely a 

business decision of each Market Maker 

that determines to purchase Purge Ports. 

Additionally, Market Makers are not 

precluded from using the purge 

messages provided by either the MEI 

protocol or the cancel messages 

provided by the FIX protocol. Under the 

MEI protocol, Market Makers may 

request that all quotations for all 

underlyings, or for a specific 

underlying, be removed, and that new 

inbound quotations for all underlyings, 

or specific underlyings, be blocked. 

Under the FIX protocol, Electronic 

Exchange Members (‘‘EEMs’’) may also 

request that all, or a subset, of orders for 

an MPID, or all Day or GTC orders for 

an MPID, on the requesting session, be 

canceled. As such, a dedicated Purge 

Port is not required or necessary. Rather, 

Purge Ports were specially developed as 

an optional service to further assist 

firms in effectively managing risk. 

The Exchange operates in a highly 

competitive market in which exchanges 

offer various types of access services as 

a means to facilitate the trading 

activities of Members and other 

participants. As Purge Ports provide 

voluntary risk management 

functionality, excessive fees would 

simply serve to reduce demand for this 

optional product. The Exchange also 

believes that the proposed Purge Port 

fees are not unfairly discriminatory 

because they will apply uniformly to all 

Market Makers that choose to use 

dedicated Purge Ports. Purge Ports are 

completely voluntary and, as they relate 

solely to optional risk management 

functionality, no Market Maker is 

required or under any regulatory 

obligation to utilize them. All Market 

Makers that voluntarily select the Purge 

Port service will be charged the same 

amount for the same respective services. 

As Purge Ports are only available for 

purging and not for activities such as 

order or quote entry, the Purge Ports are 

not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination but rather are designed 

to enable Market Makers to manage their 

quoting risk and meet their heightened 

quoting obligations that other market 

participants are not subject to, which, in 

turn, benefits all market participants. 

The Exchange believes the proposed fee 

increase will continue to encourage 

better use of dedicated Purge Ports. This 

may, concurrent with the ports that 

carry quotes and other information 

necessary for market making activities, 

enable more efficient, as well as fair and 

reasonable, use of Market Makers’ 

resources. The Exchange also believes 

that the proposed fee increase is nondiscriminatory because the proposed 

Purge Port fees will apply uniformly to 

all Market Makers. Purge Ports are 

completely voluntary and no Market 

Maker is required or under any 

regulatory obligation to utilize them. All 

Market Makers that voluntarily request 

this service will be charged the same 

amount for the same service. Separately, 

the Exchange is not aware of any reason 

why market participants could not 

simply drop their Purge Ports if the 

Exchange were to establish 

unreasonable prices for its Purge Ports 

that, in the determination of such 

market participant, did not make 

business or economic sense for such 

market participant. No options market 

participant is required by rule, 

regulation, or competitive forces to 

utilize Purge Ports. As evidence of the 

fact that market participants can and do 

drop their access to exchanges based on 

non-transaction fee pricing, R2G 

Services LLC (‘‘R2G’’) filed a comment 

letter after BOX’s proposed rule changes 

to increase its connectivity fees (SR– 

BOX–2018–24, SR–BOX–2018–37, and 

SR–BOX–2019–04). The R2G Letter 

stated, ‘‘[w]hen BOX instituted a 

$10,000/month price increase for 

connectivity; we had no choice but to 

terminate connectivity into them as well 

as terminate our market data 

relationship. The cost benefit analysis 

just didn’t make any sense for us at 

those new levels.’’ Similarly, the 

Exchange’s affiliate, MIAX Emerald, 

LLC (‘‘MIAX Emerald’’), noted in a 

recent filing that once MIAX Emerald 

issued a notice that it was adopting 

Trading Permit fees, among other nontransaction fees, one Member dropped 

its access to the Exchange as a result of 

those fees.21 Accordingly, these 

examples show that if an exchange sets 

too high of a fee for non-transaction fees 

for its relevant marketplace, market 

participants can choose to no longer 

access that particular exchange. 

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. 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change does not impose any burden 

intra-market competition because the 

use of Purge Ports is an optional service 

offered by the Exchange and no Market 

Maker is required or under any 

regulatory obligation to utilize them. 

The Exchange offers Purge Ports as a 

package and provides Market Makers 

with the option to receive up to two (2) 

Purge Ports per matching engine to 

which it connects via a Full Service MEI 

Port. The Exchange currently has 

twenty-four (24) matching engines 

which means Market Makers may 

receive up to forty-eight (48) Purge Ports 

for a single monthly fee. The Exchange 

does not believe that the proposed 

change represents a significant 

departure from previous pricing offered 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Notices 37367 

22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 23 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

24 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3By amendment of the proposed rule change, the 

Exchange has removed several of these proposed 

changes from the original proposal. See infra notes 

7 and 10. 

by the Exchange or pricing offered by 

the Exchange’s competitors. 

Additionally, Market Makers may opt to 

disfavor the Exchange’s pricing if they 

believe that alternatives offer them 

better value. Accordingly, the Exchange 

does not believe that the proposed 

change will impair the ability of Market 

Makers or competing venues to 

maintain their competitive standing in 

the financial markets. 

The Exchange believes that fees for 

the proposed Purge Ports and 

connectivity, in general, are constrained 

by the robust competition for order flow 

among exchanges and non-exchange 

markets. Further, excessive fees for 

connectivity, including Purge Port fees, 

would serve to impair an exchange’s 

ability to compete for order flow rather 

than burdening competition. The 

Exchange also does not believe the 

proposed rule change would impact 

intramarket competition as it would 

apply to all Market Makers equally. 

The Exchange also does not believe 

that the proposed rule change will result 

in any burden on inter-market 

competition that is not necessary or 

appropriate in furtherance of the 

purposes of the Act. The Exchange 

operates in a highly competitive 

environment, and as discussed above, 

its ability to price access and ports is 

constrained by competition among 

exchanges and third parties. There are 

15 other U.S. options exchanges, which 

the Exchange must consider in its 

pricing discipline in order to compete 

for market participants. In this 

competitive environment, market 

participants are free to choose which 

competing exchange to use to satisfy 

their business needs. As a result, the 

Exchange believes this proposed rule 

change permits fair competition among 

national securities exchanges. 

Accordingly, the Exchange does not 

believe its proposed fee changes impose 

any burden on competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

Written comments were neither 

solicited nor 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 Act,22 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(2) 23 thereunder. At any time 

within 60 days of the filing of the 

proposed rule change, the Commission 

summarily may temporarily suspend 

such rule change if it appears to the 

Commission that such action is 

necessary or appropriate in the public 

interest, for the protection of investors, 

or otherwise in furtherance of the 

purposes of the Act. If the Commission 

takes such action, the Commission 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 (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

MIAX–2021–29 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–MIAX–2021–29. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

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

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 

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

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change. 

Persons submitting comments are 

cautioned that we do not redact or edit 

personal identifying information from 

comment submissions. You should 

submit only information that you wish 

to make available publicly. All 

submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–MIAX–2021–29 and should 

be submitted on or before August 5, 

2021. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.24

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15034 Filed 7–14–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–92374; File No. SR–NYSE– 

2020–89] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New 

York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of 

Filing of Amendment No. 2 and Order 

Granting Accelerated Approval to a 

Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by 

Amendment No. 2, To Amend NYSE 

Rule 7.35C 

July 9, 2021. 

I. Introduction 

On October 23, 2020, New York Stock 

Exchange LLC (‘‘Exchange’’) filed with 

the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) pursuant 

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

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

19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule 

change to (1) provide the Exchange 

authority to facilitate a Trading Halt 

Auction if a security has not reopened 

by 3:30 p.m. following a market-wide 

circuit-breaker halt (‘‘MWCB Halt’’); (2) 

widen the Auction Collar for an 

Exchange-facilitated Trading Halt 

Auction following an MWCB Halt; (3) 

provide that certain DMM (designated 

market maker) Interest will not be 

canceled following an Exchangefacilitated Auction; and (4) change the 

Auction Reference Price for Exchangefacilitated Core Open Auctions.3 The 

proposed rule change was published for 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES