Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: DAVID LAIKEN 

DOCKET NUMBER: 113 

DATE: OCTOBER 25, 1963 

DOCUMENT TYPE: COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE 

In re: David Laiken, Respondent 

CEA Docket No. 113 

Complaint and Notice of Hearing Under Section 6(b) of the Commodity Exchange 

Act 

There is reason to believe that the respondent, David Laiken, has violated 

the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. Chapter 1) and the regulations made 

pursuant thereto, and in accordance with the provisions of section 6(b) of the 

said Act (7 U.S.C. § 9), this complaint and notice of hearing is issued stating 

the charges in that respect as follows: 

I 

The New York Mercantile Exchange is now and was at all times material to this 

complaint a duly designated contract market under the Commodity Exchange Act. 

II 

Respondent, David Laiken, an individual whose address is 6 Harrison Street, 

New York, New York, is now and was at all times material to this complaint a 

registered floor broker under the Commodity Exchange Act, and a member of the 

New York Mercantile Exchange. 

III 

The transactions referred to in this complaint relate to the purchase and 

sale of May 1963 potato futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange. 

Such contracts could have been used for hedging transactions 

in interstate commerce in potatoes or the products or by-products thereof, or 

for determining the price basis of transactions in interstate commerce in 

potatoes, or for delivering potatoes sold, shipped, or received in interstate 

commerce. 

IV 

On January 11, 1963, the respondent, in his capacity as floor broker, 

received for execution one order to buy five May 1963 potato futures contracts 

on the New York Mercantile Exchange for the account of a futures commission 

merchant. The respondent noncompetitively filled such order with five contracts 

which he had purchased previously for his own account. By reason thereof, the 

respondent made a purchase and sale of a commodity for future delivery on or 

subject to the rules of a contract market otherwise than by open and competitive 

methods, in willful violation of section 1.38 of the regulations under the 

Commodity Exchange Act (17 CFR 1.38). 

V 
Page 2 

On January 11, 1963, the respondent, in his capacity as floor broker, 

received for execution one order to buy thirteen May 1963 potato futures 

contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange for the account of a futures 

commission merchant. The respondent noncompetitively filled such order with 

thirteen contracts which he had purchased previously for his own account. By 

reason thereof, the respondent made a purchase and sale 

of a commodity for future delivery on or subject to the rules of a contract 

market otherwise than by open and competitive methods, in willful violation of 

section 1.38 of the regulations under the Commodity Exchange Act (17 CFR 1.38). 

VI 

On January 11, 1963, the respondent, in his capacity as floor broker, 

received for execution six orders to buy a total of twenty-six May 1963 potato 

futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange for the account of a 

futures commission merchant. The respondent noncompetitively filled such orders 

by purchasing twenty-six contracts at a certain price from another floor broker 

who had been instructed by the respondent to offer these contracts at such price 

for the account of the firm of Laiken and Laiken, a partnership composed of the 

respondent and his wife. By reason thereof, the respondent made a purchase and 

sale of a commodity for future delivery on or subject to the rules of a contract 

market otherwise than by open and competitive methods, in willful violation of 

section 1.38 of the regulations under the Commodity Exchange Act (17 CFR 1.38). 

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that this complaint and notice of hearing be 

served upon the respondent. The respondent will have twenty (20) days after the 

receipt of this notice of hearing in which to file with the Hearing Clerk, 

United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C., 20250, an answer 

with an original and three copies fully and 

completely stating the nature of the defense and admitting or denying, 

specifically and in detail, each material and relevant allegation of this 

complaint. Allegations not answered will be deemed admitted for the purpose of 

this proceeding. Failure to file an answer will constitute an admission of all 

the material allegations of this complaint and waiver of hearing. The 

respondent is hereby notified that unless hearing is waived, either expressly or 

by failure to file an answer and request a hearing, a hearing will be held at 

10:00 a.m., local time, on November 26, 1963, in New York, New York, at a place 

therein to be specified later, before a referee designated to conduct such 

hearing. At such hearing the respondent will have the right to appear and show 

cause, if any there be, why an order should not be made suspending or revoking 

the registration of the respondent as a floor broker, and directing that all 

contract markets refuse all trading privileges to the respondent for such period 

of time as may be determined. 

It is ordered that this complaint and notice of hearing be served on the 

respondent at least twenty (20) days prior to the date set for hearing. 

Done at Washington, D. C. 

October 25, 1963 

/s/ George L. Mehren 

George L. Mehren 

Assistant Secretary 

LOAD-DATE: June 12, 2008 
Page 3