Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Notices 32657 

8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). 

10 Id. 

11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 

12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

using its facilities; Section 6(b)(5) of the 

Act,8 which requires, among other 

things, that the rules of a national 

securities exchange not be designed to 

permit unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers; 

and Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,9 which 

requires that the rules of a national 

securities exchange do not impose any 

burden on competition not necessary or 

appropriate in furtherance of the Act. 

Accordingly, the Commission believes 

that the procedures provided by Section 

19(b)(2) of the Act 10 will provide a more 

appropriate mechanism for determining 

whether the proposed rule change is 

consistent with the Act. Therefore, the 

Commission finds that it is appropriate 

in the public interest, for the protection 

of investors, and otherwise in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act, 

to abrogate the proposed rule change. 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,11 that File 

No. SR–NASDAQ–2009–053, be and 

hereby is, summarily abrogated. If 

NASDAQ chooses to re-file the 

proposed rule change, it must do so 

pursuant to Sections 19(b)(1) 12 and 

19(b)(2) of the Act.13

By the Commission. 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–15998 Filed 7–7–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[File No. 500–1] 

In the Matter of GenX Corporation; 

Order of Suspension of Trading 

July 2, 2009. 

It appears to the Securities and 

Exchange Commission that there is a 

lack of current and accurate information 

concerning the securities of GenX 

Corporation because of questions about 

the accuracy and adequacy of publicly 

disseminated information appearing in 

stock promotional materials, and 

elsewhere, concerning among other 

things the company’s purported 

partnerships and other relationships 

with certain individuals and entities. 

The Commission is of the opinion that 

the public interest and the protection of 

investors require a suspension of trading 

in the securities of the company listed 

above. 

Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to 

Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934, that trading in the 

securities of the above listed company is 

suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. 

EDT on July 2, 2009, through 11:59 p.m. 

EDT, on July 16, 2009. 

By the Commission. 

Jill M. Peterson, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–16040 Filed 7–2–09; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–60186; File No. SR– 

NASDAQ–2009–056] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of 

Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To 

Adopt Rules To Implement the Options 

Order Protection and Locked/Crossed 

Market Plan 

June 29, 2009. 

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 June 23, 

2009, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC 

(‘‘NASDAQ’’) 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 NASDAQ. 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 adopt rules 

to implement the Options Order 

Protection and Locked/Crossed Market 

Plan (the ‘‘Plan’’), and to delete 

provisions which will no longer be 

applicable following adoption of the 

Plan. The text of the proposed rule 

change is available at http:// 

nasdaqomx.cchwallstreet.com/, at 

NASDAQ’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, 

NASDAQ 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. 

NASDAQ 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 

On May 7, 2008, NASDAQ filed an 

executed copy of the Options Order 

Protection and Locked/Crossed Market 

Plan (‘‘Plan’’), joining all other approved 

options markets in proposing the Plan. 

The Plan requires each options 

exchange to adopt rules implementing 

various requirements specified in the 

Plan. This proposal is designed to fulfill 

that obligation. 

Background 

The Plan will replace the current Plan 

for the Purpose of Creating and 

Operating an lntermarket Option 

Linkage (‘‘Linkage Plan’’). That plan 

requires its participant exchanges to 

operate a stand-alone system or 

‘‘Linkage’’ for sending order-flow 

between exchanges to limit tradethroughs. The Options Clearing 

Corporation (‘‘OCC [sic]) operates the 

Linkage system (the ‘‘System’’). The 

Linkage rules provide for unique types 

of Linkage orders, with a complicated 

set of requirements as to who may send 

such orders and under what conditions. 

Before a market maker can trade through 

another exchange’s quote, it first must 

send a Linkage order and then wait 

three seconds for a response. 

While the Linkage largely has 

operated satisfactorily, it is under 

significant strain. When the 

Commission approved the Linkage Plan 

in 2000, average daily volume (‘‘ADV’’) 

in the options market was 

approximately 2.6 million contracts 

across all exchanges. Now the ADV has 

increased four-fold to more than 10.8 

million contracts, putting added strain 

on the ability of market makers to 

comply with the complex Linkage rules. 

At the same time, the options markets 

have been moving towards quoting in 

pennies. This greatly increases the 

number of price changes in an option, 

giving rise to greater chances of tradethroughs and missing markets as market 

makers send Linkage orders and have to 

wait three seconds for a response. 

Based upon experience in the equities 

markets following the adoption of 

Regulation NMS in 2005, the options 

exchanges have determined to replace 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

32658 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Notices 

3See Rule 611(b)(1) under the Exchange Act. 

4See Linkage Plan Section 8(c)(iii)(E). 

5See Rule 611(b)(3) under the Exchange Act. 

6See Rule 611(b)(4) under the Exchange Act. 

7See Rule 611(b)(5) and (6) under the Exchange 

Act. 

8See Rule 611(b)(8) under the Exchange Act. 

9See Linkage Plan Section 8(c)(iii)(C). 

10See Linkage Plan Section 8(c)(iii)(G). 

11See Rule 611(b)(9) under the Exchange Act. 

12For a further discussion on how this exemption 

operates, see Regulation NMS Adopting Release, 

Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005) at 

notes 322–325. 

the System with the Plan providing for 

a set of rules and procedures designed 

to avoid trade-throughs and locked 

markets. The key to Regulation NMS’s 

price-protection provisions is the 

lntermarket Sweep Order, or ISO. Each 

equity exchange must adopt rules 

‘‘reasonably designed to prevent tradethroughs.’’ Exempted from tradethrough liability is an ISO, which is an 

order a member sends to an exchange 

displaying a price inferior to the 

national best bid and offer (‘‘NBBO’’), 

while simultaneously sending orders to 

trade against the full size of any other 

exchange that is displaying the NBBO. 

A simple prohibition against most tradethroughs, coupled with the ISO 

mechanism, has given the equities 

markets a straight-forward system to 

provide customers with price protection 

in a fast-moving, high-volume market 

that is quoted in pennies. 

The Proposed New Definitions. The 

proposed Plan incorporates a number of 

defined terms, some identical to 

definitions from the existing Linkage 

Plan and others that have been 

developed along with the proposed Plan 

itself. Accordingly, NASDAQ is 

proposing to adopt new Chapter XII, 

Section 1 which sets forth the defined 

terms for use under the proposed Plan. 

The Proposed Trade-Through Rule. 

The Plan essentially would apply the 

Regulation NMS price-protection 

provisions to the options markets. 

Similar to Regulation NMS, the Plan 

would require participants to adopt 

rules ‘‘reasonably designed to prevent 

Trade-Throughs,’’ while exempting ISOs 

from that prohibition. 

Accordingly, Nasdaq is proposing to 

adopt new Chapter XII, Section 2 which 

codifies the requirement that Nasdaq 

and other Plan participants avoid 

trading through superior prices on other 

markets. Nasdaq is also proposing to 

add an ISO order in Chapter VI, Section 

1(e)(7) based upon the ISO order that 

Nasdaq currently uses for compliance 

with Regulation NMS when trading 

equities. The ISO order will be exempt 

from the prohibition against trading 

throughs. In addition, Nasdaq proposes 

to add several additional exceptions to 

the trade-through prohibition that track 

the exceptions under Regulation NMS 

or correspond to unique aspects of the 

options market,’’ [sic] or both. 

Specifically: 

• System Issues: Section 2(b)(1) of the 

NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(i) of the 

Plan which corresponds to the systemfailure exception in Regulation NMS 3

for equity securities and permits trading 

through an Eligible Exchange that is 

experiencing system problems. 

• Trading Rotations: Section 2(b)(2) 

of the NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(ii) 

of the Plan which carries forward the 

current Trade-Through exception in the 

Old Plan 4 and is the options equivalent 

to the single price opening exception in 

Regulation NMS for equity securities.5

Some Options exchanges (other than 

NOM) use a trading rotation to open an 

option for trading, or to reopen an 

option after a trading halt. The rotation 

is effectively a single price auction to 

price the option and there are no 

practical means to include prices on 

other exchanges in that auction. 

• Crossed Markets: Section 2(b)(3) of 

the NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(iii) of 

the Plan which corresponds to the 

crossed quote exception in Regulation 

NMS for equity securities.6 If a 

Protected Bid is higher than a Protected 

Offer, it indicates that there is some 

form of market dislocation or inaccurate 

quoting. Permitting transactions to be 

executed without regard to TradeThroughs in a Crossed Market will 

allow the market to quickly return to 

equilibrium. 

• Intermarket Sweep Orders (‘‘ISOs’’): 

These two exceptions correspond to the 

ISO exceptions in Regulation NMS for 

equity securities.7 Section 2(b)(4) of the 

NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(iv) of the 

Plan which permits a Participant to 

execute orders it receives from other 

Participants or members that are marked 

as ISO even when it is not at the NBBO. 

Section 2(b)(5) of the NOM Rules tracks 

Section 5(b)(v) of the Plan which allows 

a Participant to execute inbound orders 

when it is not at the NBBO, provided it 

simultaneously ‘‘sweeps’’ all betterpriced interest displayed by Eligible 

Exchanges. 

• Quote Flickering: Section 2(b)(6) of 

the NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(vi) of 

the Plan which corresponds to the 

flickering quote exception in Regulation 

NMS for equity securities.8 Options 

quotations change as rapidly, if not 

more rapidly, than equity quotations. 

Indeed, they track the price of the 

underlying security and thus change 

when the price of the underlying 

security changes. This exception 

provides a form of ‘‘safe harbor’’ to 

market participants to allow them to 

trade through prices that have changed 

within a second of the transaction 

causing a nominal Trade-Through. 

• Non-Firm Quotes: Section 2(b)(7) of 

the NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(vii) 

of the Plan which carries forward the 

current non-firm quote Trade-Through 

exception in the Old Plan.9 By 

definition, an Eligible Exchange’s 

quotations may not be firm for 

automatic execution during this trading 

state and thus should not be protected 

from Trade-Throughs. In effect, these 

quotations are akin to ‘‘manual 

quotations’’ under Regulation NMS. 

• Complex Trades: Section 2(b)(8) of 

the NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(viii) 

of the Plan which carries forward the 

current complex trade exception in the 

Old Plan 10 and will be implemented 

through rules adopted by the 

Participants and approved by the 

Commission. Complex trades consist of 

multiple transactions (‘‘legs’’) effected at 

a net price, and it is not practical to 

price each leg at a price that does not 

constitute a Trade-Through. Narrowlycrafted implementing rules will ensure 

that this exception does not undercut 

Trade-Through protections. 

• Customer Stopped Orders: Section 

2(b)(9) of the NOM Rules tracks Section 

5(b)(ix) of the Plan which corresponds 

to the customer stopped order exception 

in Regulation NMS for equity 

securities.11 It permits broker dealers to 

execute large orders over time at a price 

agreed upon by a customer, even though 

the price of the option may change 

before the order is executed in its 

entirety.12

• Stopped Orders and Price 

Improvement: Section 2(b)(10) of the 

NOM Rules tracks Section 5(b)(xi) of the 

Plan which would apply if an order is 

stopped at price that did not constitute 

a Trade-Through at the time of the stop. 

In this case, an exchange could seek 

price improvement for that order, even 

if the market moves in the interim, and 

the transaction ultimately is effected at 

a price that would trade through the 

then currently-displayed market. 

• Benchmark Trades: Section 2(b)(11) 

of the NOM Rules tracks Section 

5(b)(xii) of the Plan which would cover 

trades executed at a price not tied to the 

price of an option at the time of 

execution, and for which the material 

terms were not reasonably determinable 

at the time of the commitment to make 

the trade. An example would be a 

volume-weighted average price trade, or 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Notices 32659 

13See Rule 611(b)(7) under the Exchange Act. 

14 15 U.S.C. 78f. 

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

‘‘VWAP.’’ This corresponds to a TradeThrough exemption in Regulation NMS 

for equity trades.13 NOM does not 

currently permit these types of options 

trades, and any transaction-type relying 

on this exemption would require NOM 

to adopt implementing rules, subject to 

Commission review and approval. 

The Proposed Locked and Crossed 

Markets Rule. Similar to Regulation 

NMS, the Plan requires its participants 

to adopt, maintain and enforce rules 

requiring members: To avoid displaying 

locked and crossed markets; to reconcile 

such markets; and to prohibit members 

from engaging in a pattern or practice of 

displaying locked and crossed markets. 

These provisions are subject to 

exceptions that are contained in the 

rules of each participant and that are to 

be approved by the Commission. 

Accordingly, NASDAQ has proposed 

to adopt Chapter XII, Section 3 of the 

NOM rules which would set forth the 

general prohibition against locking/ 

crossing other eligible exchanges as well 

as several exceptions that the Plan 

participants approved that permit 

locked markets in limited 

circumstances. Specifically, the 

exceptions to the general prohibition on 

locking and crossing occur when (1) the 

locking or crossing quotation was 

displayed at a time when the Exchange 

was experiencing a failure, material 

delay, or malfunction of its systems or 

equipment; (2) the locking or crossing 

quotation was displayed at a time when 

there is a Crossed Market; or (3) the 

Member simultaneously routed an ISO 

to execute against the full displayed size 

of any locked or crossed Protected Bid 

or Protected Offer. 

NOM Routing Arrangements. 

NASDAQ is proposing to rely upon the 

order routing arrangements already in 

place on its market 

Proposed Temporary Linkage Rule. 

NASDAQ also proposes to adopt 

Chapter XII, Section 4 which provides 

that the Exchange will continue to 

accept Principal Acting as Agent 

(‘‘P/A’’) and Principal Orders from 

options exchanges that continue to use 

such orders to address trade-throughs. 

[sic] via the existing linkage for a 

temporary period. NASDAQ is also 

proposing to modify Chapter VII, 

Section 5 to clarify the obligations of 

market makers to honor all trades routed 

pursuant to proposed Chapter XII of the 

NOM rules, regardless of whether it is 

routed via the Linkage or through a 

private linkage arrangement. 

Miscellaneous. NASDAQ is making 

several miscellaneous minor changes to 

its rules in connection with the new 

Plan. Specifically, NASDAQ is 

proposing modifications to Chapter IV, 

Section 5 to remove unnecessary 

references to the existing Linkage Plan, 

and also to Chapter 7, Section 5 to 

remove references to ‘‘P/A’’ orders and 

also to the existing Linkage Plan. 

Fees. The Exchange is proposing no 

changes to the fees applicable to orders 

routed by NOM to away markets. The 

fee is the same whether the order is 

routed to NOM from an away market via 

the linkage or via a private routing 

arrangement. NASDAQ is retaining 

references to the current Linkage in 

NASDAQ Rule 7050(1) to assess fees for 

orders sent to NASDAQ via the Linkage 

during the temporary period. 

Implementation. NASDAQ proposes 

to implement this proposed rule change 

upon withdrawal from the current 

Linkage Plan and effectiveness of the 

new Plan. Implementation is currently 

scheduled for August 31, 2009. 

2. Statutory Basis 

NASDAQ believes that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the 

provisions of Section 6 of the Act,14 in 

general, and with Sections 6(b)(5) of the 

Act,15 in particular. The proposal is 

consistent with Section 6(b)(5) in that it 

is 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. In particular, the 

Exchange believes that adopting rules 

that implement the Plan will facilitate 

the trading of options in a national 

market system by establishing more 

efficient protection against tradethroughs and locked and crossed 

markets. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

NASDAQ does not believe that the 

proposed rule change will result in any 

burden on competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act, as amended. 

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 

Within 35 days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register or within such longer period (i) 

as the Commission may designate up to 

90 days of such date if it finds such 

longer period to be appropriate and 

publishes its reasons for so finding or 

(ii) as to which the self-regulatory 

organization consents, the Commission 

will: 

A. By order approve such proposed 

rule change, or 

B. Institute proceedings to determine 

whether the proposed rule change 

should be 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 e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number SR–NASDAQ–2009–056 on the 

subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–NASDAQ–2009–056. This 

file number should be included on the 

subject line if e-mail 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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

32660 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Notices 

16 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)(3)(A). 

5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

6Each ETP Holder is assigned an ETP ID which 

is used as a firm identifier within Exchange 

systems. 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

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

available for inspection and copying 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 will also be available 

for inspection and copying at the 

principal office of the self-regulatory 

organization. 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– 

NASDAQ–2009–056 and should be 

submitted on or before July 29, 2009. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.16

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–15991 Filed 7–7–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–60191; File No. SR– 

NYSEArca–2009–58] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE 

Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change Amending NYSE Arca 

Equities Rule 7.31 

June 30, 2009. 

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

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

notice is hereby given that on June 24, 

2009, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’ 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. 

NYSE Arca filed the proposed rule 

change as a ‘‘non-controversial’’ 

proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 

of the Act 4 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 

thereunder,5 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 Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31. A copy 

of this filing is available on the 

Exchange’s Web site at http:// 

www.nyse.com, at the Exchange’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 

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 those 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 parts of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The purpose of this rule filing is to 

add Self-Trade Prevention (‘‘STP’’) 

modifiers to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 

7.31. The proposed STP modifiers are 

designed to prevent two orders with the 

same ETP ID from executing against 

each other. The Exchange proposes 

adding four STP modifiers that will be 

implemented and made available at the 

Equity Trading Permit ID (‘‘ETP ID’’) 

level.6 The STP modifiers will not be 

automatically implemented across all 

ETP ID’s, but rather ETP Holders must 

elect to designate each order with one 

of the STP modifiers. The STP modifier 

on the incoming order controls the 

interaction between two orders marked 

with STP modifiers. The four new STP 

modifiers are discussed more 

thoroughly below. 

STP Cancel Newest (‘‘STPN’’) 

An incoming order marked with the 

STPN modifier will not execute against 

opposite side resting interest marked 

with any of the STP modifiers from the 

same ETP ID. The incoming order 

marked with the STPN modifier will be 

cancelled back to the originating ETP 

Holder. The resting order marked with 

one of the STP modifiers, which 

otherwise would have interacted with 

the incoming order by the same ETP 

Holder, will remain on the NYSE Arca 

Book. 

STPN Example 1: An order to buy 500 

shares @ $22.00 is marked with any of the 

four STP modifiers and becomes a resting 

order in the NYSE Arca Book. Subsequently, 

an order to sell 500 shares @ $22.00 is 

entered with the same ETP ID and marked 

with the STPN modifier. 

STPN Result 1: The incoming sell order for 

500 shares @ $22.00 marked with the STPN 

modifier is cancelled back to the originating 

ETP Holder. The resting buy order for 500 

shares at $22.00 marked one of the four STP 

modifiers remains on the NYSE Arca Book. 

STPN Example 2: An order to buy 500 

shares @ $22.00 is marked with any of the 

four STP modifiers and becomes a resting 

order in the NYSE Arca Book. Subsequently, 

an order to sell 700 shares @ $22.00 is 

entered with the same ETP ID and marked 

with the STPN modifier. 

STPN Result 2: The incoming sell order for 

700 shares @ $22.00 marked with the STPN 

modifier is cancelled back to the originating 

ETP Holder. The resting buy order for 500 

shares at $22.00 marked one of the four STP 

modifiers remains on the NYSE Arca Book. 

STPN Example 3: An order to buy 500 

shares @ $22.00 is marked with any of the 

four STP modifiers and becomes a resting 

order in the NYSE Arca Book. Subsequently, 

an order to sell 400 shares @ $22.00 is 

entered with the same ETP ID and marked 

with the STPN modifier. 

STPN Result 3: The incoming sell order for 

400 shares @ $22.00 marked with the STPN 

modifier is cancelled back to the originating 

ETP Holder. The resting buy order for 500 

shares at $22.00 marked one of the four STP 

modifiers remains on the NYSE Arca Book. 

STP Cancel Oldest (‘‘STPO’’) 

An incoming order marked with the 

STPO modifier will not execute against 

opposite side resting interest marked 

with any of the STP modifiers from the 

same ETP ID. The resting order marked 

with any of the STP modifiers, which 

otherwise would have interacted with 

the incoming order by the same ETP 

Holder, will be cancelled back to the 

originating ETP Holder. The incoming 

order marked with the STPO modifier 

will remain on the NYSE Arca Book. 

STPO Example 1: An order to buy 500 

shares @ $22.00 is marked with any of the 

four STP modifiers and becomes a resting 

order in the NYSE Arca Book. Subsequently, 

an order to sell 500 shares @ $22.00 is 

entered with the same ETP ID and marked 

with the STPO modifier. 

STPO Result 1: The resting buy order for 

500 shares at $22.00 marked with one of the 

four STP modifiers is cancelled back to the 

originating ETP Holder. The incoming sell 

order for 500 shares @ $22.00 marked with 

the STPO modifier is entered in the NYSE 

Arca Book. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES