Document ID: SEC-2019-1452-0001
Agency: sec
Document Type: Notice
Title: Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe Exchange, Inc.
Posted Date: 2019-10-07T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 194 (Monday, October 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53509-53520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21724]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87194; File No. SR-CBOE-2019-064]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend 
Its Rule Regarding How Complex Orders Are Processed Through the 
Solicitation Auction Mechanism (``C-SAM'' or ``C-SAM Auction''), and 
Move That Rule From the Currently Effective Rulebook to the Shell 
Structure for the Exchange's Rulebook That Will Become Effective Upon 
the Migration of the Exchange's Trading Platform to the Same System 
Used by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges

October 1, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given 
that on September 23, 2019, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or 
``Cboe Options'') 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 Exchange. The 
Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the 
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes 
to amend its Rule regarding how complex orders are processed through 
the Solicitation Auction Mechanism (``C-SAM'' or ``C-SAM Auction''), 
and move that Rule from the currently effective Rulebook (``current 
Rulebook'') to the shell structure for the Exchange's Rulebook that 
will become effective upon the migration of the Exchange's trading 
platform to the same system used by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges (as 
defined below) (``shell Rulebook''). The text of the proposed rule 
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the 
Exchange's website (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
    In 2016, the Exchange's parent company, Cboe Global Markets, Inc. 
(formerly named CBOE Holdings, Inc.) (``Cboe Global''), which is also 
the parent company of Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``C2''), acquired Cboe 
EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''), Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'' or 
``EDGX Options''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or ``BZX 
Options''), and Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'' and, together with 
Cboe Options, C2, EDGX, EDGA, and BZX, the ``Cboe Affiliated 
Exchanges''). The Cboe Affiliated Exchanges are working to align 
certain system functionality, retaining only intended differences 
between the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, in the context of a technology 
migration. Cboe Options intends to migrate its trading platform to the 
same system used by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, which the Exchange 
expects to complete on October 7, 2019. Cboe Options believes offering 
similar functionality to the extent practicable will reduce potential 
confusion for market participants.
    In connection with this technology migration, the Exchange has a 
shell Rulebook that resides alongside its current Rulebook, which shell 
Rulebook will contain the Rules that will be in place upon completion 
of the Cboe Options technology migration. The Exchange proposes to add 
the provisions of its Rules regarding C-SAM Auctions, as proposed to be 
modified in this rule filing, to Rule 5.40 in the shell Rulebook.
    The proposed rule change moves the provisions regarding SAM 
Auctions for complex orders from current Interpretation and Policy .01 
\5\ to proposed Rule 5.40, and provides additional detail to the Rules, 
as well as makes certain additional changes. Current Interpretation and 
Policy .01 states complex orders may be executed through a SAM Auction 
at a net debit or net credit price provided the eligibility 
requirements in current Rule 6.74B(a) are satisfied and the Agency 
Order is eligible for a SAM Auction considering its complex order type, 
order origin code (i.e., non-broker-dealer public customer, broker-
dealers that are not Market-Makers or specialists on an options 
exchange, and/or Market-Makers or specialists on an options exchange), 
class, and marketability as determined by the Exchange. Order 
allocation is the same as in current Rule 6.74B(b)(2), provided that 
complex order priority rules applicable to bids and offers in the 
individual series legs of a complex order contained in current Rule 
6.53C(d) or Interpretation and Policy .06, as applicable, will continue 
to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange proposed to delete Rule 6.74B, Interpretation 
and Policy .01 from current Rulebook in SR-CBOE-2019-063 (filed 
September 23, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it will provide more clarity to the Rules to 
have a separate rule regarding how SAM Auctions apply to complex orders 
(``C-SAM Auctions''), and thus proposes to add Rule 5.40 to the shell 
Rulebook. As they are today, complex orders will continue to be 
processed and executed in a C-SAM Auction in a substantially similar 
manner as simple orders are processed and executed in an SAM Auction 
pursuant to Rule 5.39,\6\ and

[[Page 53510]]

therefore proposed Rule 5.40 is substantially similar to Rule 5.39 in 
the shell Rulebook.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See current Rule 6.74B, Interpretation and Policy .01 
(``complex orders may be executed through the [SAM] Auction at a net 
debit or net credit price'' with certain exceptions); see also 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57610 (April 3, 2008), 73 FR 
19535, 19536 (April 10, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2008-14) (which approved 
current Rule 6.74B, Interpretation and Policy .01 and stated that 
the Exchange had ``developed an enhanced auction mechanism for 
larger-sized simple and complex Agency Orders that are to be 
executed against solicited orders'', which auction mechanism would 
not permit responds to be entered for the account of an options 
market-maker from another options exchange).
    \7\ The Exchange recently proposed certain amendments to the 
simple SAM Auction, many of which the Exchange similarly proposes to 
apply to C-SAM Auctions. See SR-CBOE-2019-063 (filed September 23, 
2019). The Exchange notes it proposed to delete all of current Rule 
6.74B in that rule filing, and thus the proposed rule change merely 
adds all provisions that are applicable to C-SAM Auctions (as 
proposed to be amended) to the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change adds to the proposed introductory 
paragraph \8\ that the Solicited Order may consist of one or more 
solicited orders.\9\ This accommodates multiple contra-parties and 
increases the opportunities for customer orders to be submitted into a 
C-SAM Auction with the potential for price improvement, since the 
Solicited Order must stop the full size of the Agency Order. This has 
no impact on the execution of the Agency Order, which may already trade 
against multiple contra-parties depending on the final auction price, 
as set forth in proposed paragraph (e) (and current Rule 6.74B(b)(2) 
and Interpretation and Policy .01). The Exchange notes that with regard 
to order entry, the first order submitted into the system is marked as 
the initiating/agency side and the second order is marked as the 
contra-side. Additionally, the Solicited Order will always be entered 
as a single order, even if that order consists of multiple contra-
parties who are allocated their portion of the trade in a post-trade 
allocation.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The proposed rule change also adds to the proposed 
introductory paragraph that for purposes of proposed Rule 5.40, the 
term ``SBBO'' means the synthetic best bid or offer on the Exchange 
at the particular point in time applicable to the reference. This is 
merely an addition of terminology used throughout the Rule, but has 
no impact on functionality.
    \9\ The Solicited Order cannot have a Capacity F for the same 
executing firm ID (``EFID'') as the Agency Order. See current Rule 
6.74B, Interpretation and Policy .03. Because the Solicited Order 
cannot be facilitated by the Initiating TPH, the Exchange currently 
enforces this restriction through surveillance. The Exchange 
proposes to add these systematic blocks, but will continue to 
conduct surveillance for compliance with the rule that prevents the 
Solicited Order from being a facilitation. The Agency Order and 
Solicited Order cannot both be for the accounts of a customer. 
Current Rule 6.74B does not contain a similar prohibition. However, 
the Exchange believes it is appropriate for such customer-to-
customer crosses to be submitted to a C-AIM Auction pursuant to Rule 
5.38 in the shell Rulebook, as that rule contains a provision for 
Customer-to-Customer Immediate C-AIM Crosses.
    \10\ The Exchange notes that while other exchange rules do not 
specify whether the contra-side order in a solicitation auction 
mechanism may consist of multiple orders, the contra-side order for 
Qualified Contingent Cross Orders (see Rule 6.53 of the current 
Rulebook and Rule 5.6(c) of the shell Rulebook), which similarly 
have a minimum quantity requirement and are fully crossed against an 
Solicited Order that must be for a minimum number of contracts, may 
consist of multiple contra-side orders. See also Rule 5.38, 
introductory paragraph of the shell Rulebook (which permits the 
contra-side order for automated improvement mechanism auctions of 
complex orders (``C-AIM Auctions'') to consist of multiple solicited 
orders). However, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'') Regulatory Information 
Circular 2014-013 states that the contra-side order submitted into a 
crossing mechanism (including the ISE solicited order mechanism) may 
consist of one or more parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change deletes the restriction that a solicited 
order cannot be for the account of any Market-Maker appointed in the 
class. Current Rule 6.74B, Interpretation and Policy .03, which applies 
to SAM Auctions of complex orders), imposes this restriction.\11\ With 
respect to the simple markets, appointed Market-Makers have a variety 
of obligations related to providing liquidity and making competitive 
markets in their appointed classes. Therefore, prohibiting Market-
Makers from being solicited in a simple SAM Auction may encourage those 
Market-Makers to provide liquidity in that auction to provide liquidity 
through responses, as well as quotes on the Book that may have the 
opportunity to execute against the Agency Order. Because Market-Makers 
have no obligations to provide liquidity to complex markets (and there 
is no quoting functionality available in the complex order book 
(``COB'')), appointed Market-Makers are on equal footing with all other 
market participants with respect to C-SAM Auctions. Permitting Market-
Makers to be solicited provides all market participants with the 
opportunity to provide liquidity to execute against Agency Orders in C-
SAM Auctions in the same manner (both through solicitation, responses, 
and interest resting on the COB).\12\ Rule 5.38 in the shell Rulebook 
similarly does not restrict appointed Market-Makers from being 
solicited to participate on the contra-side of C-AIM Auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This restriction exists for simple SAM Auctions. See Rule 
5.39, introductory paragraph in the shell Rulebook.
    \12\ See Rule 5.38 of the shell Rulebook (which permits 
appointed market-makers to be solicited for C-AIM Auctions); see 
also EDGX Options Rule 21.20; and NYSE American, LLC (``American'') 
Rule 971.2NY(a)(1) (which permits all users except customers from 
being solicited as the contra-party). As further discussed below, 
the Exchange will no longer restrict Users that may submit responses 
to C-SAM Auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe permitting an appointed Market-Maker 
to be solicited for a C-SAM Auction provides the Market-Maker with any 
advantages with respect to its potential quotes in the applicable 
series in the Simple Book. Rule 4.18 prohibits any TPH from misusing 
material nonpublic information, and requires TPHs to have policies and 
procedures designed to prevent the misuse of material nonpublic 
information. When a market participant is solicited to be the contra-
side in a crossing auction, the knowledge of that auction is not yet 
public. If an appointed Market-Maker was solicited for a C-SAM Auction 
and modified its quotes in the Simple Book in the applicable series in 
response to that auction, the Exchange may determine that to be a 
violation of Rule 4.18 (which the Exchange intends to move to Rule 8.17 
of the shell Rulebook with no substantive changes). Such an action 
would only impact C-SAM Auction execution prices if those quotes were 
at the BBO in the applicable series. This is true for any TPH solicited 
for a C-SAM Auction that modified the prices of any orders it has 
resting in the applicable legs in the Simple Book or in the applicable 
complex strategy resting in the COB, as C-SAM permissible execution 
prices are based on all interest resting in the Simple Book.
    The proposed introductory paragraph for Rule 5.40 is the same as 
the corresponding paragraph for C-AIM Auctions (Rule 5.38 in the shell 
Rulebook), which is the Exchange's price improvement crossing auction 
for Agency Orders of all sizes and substantially similar to the 
Exchange's C-SAM Auctions, except C-AIM Auctions permit facilitations 
and customer-to-customer immediate crosses, while C-SAM Auctions only 
permit solicitations and do not permit customer-to-customer immediate 
crosses, as set forth above.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The proposed introductory paragraph is also substantially 
the same as the introductory paragraph in Rule 5.39 in the shell 
Rulebook, which is the rule describing the Exchange's simple SAM 
Auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 5.40(a) sets forth eligibility requirements for a C-
SAM Auction. Proposed Rule 5.40(a)(5) states the Trading Permit Holder 
that electronically submits an order into a C-SAM Auction (the 
``Initiating TPH'') may not designate an Agency Order or Solicited 
Order as Post Only. A Post Only complex order is a complex order the 
System ranks and executes pursuant to Rule 5.33 in the shell 
Rulebook,\14\

[[Page 53511]]

subjects to the Price Adjust process pursuant to Rule 5.32 in the shell 
Rulebook, or cancels or rejects (including if it is not subject to the 
Price Adjust process and locks or crosses a Protected Quotation of 
another exchange), as applicable (in accordance with User 
instructions), except the order or quote may not remove liquidity from 
the Book or route away to another Exchange. The Exchange does not 
currently offer Post Only order functionality, but will as of the 
technology migration.\15\ The Exchange believes it is appropriate to 
not permit the Agency or Solicited Order to be designated as Post Only, 
as the purpose of a Post Only order is to not execute upon entry and 
instead rest in the COB, while the purpose of a C-SAM Auction is to 
receive an execution following the Auction but prior to entering the 
COB. Proposed Rule 5.40(a)(6) states the Initiating TPH may only submit 
an Agency Order to a C-SAM Auction after the COB opens. This is 
consistent with current functionality, as executions cannot occur prior 
to the opening of trading. The proposed rule change clarifies this in 
the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Exchange does not currently offer Post Only 
functionality, but will following the technology migration. See Rule 
5.6(c) in the shell Rulebook (which describes Post Only 
functionality for simple orders). The Exchange intends to adopt a 
similar definition of Post Only for complex orders, which will be 
virtually identical to the definition of Post Only complex orders in 
the rules of Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. See C2 Rule 6.13(b)(5) and 
EDGX Options Rule 21.20(b) (which define a Post Only complex order 
as a complex order the System ranks and executes pursuant to C2 Rule 
6.12 or EDGX Options Rule 21.20, respectively, or cancels or 
rejects, as applicable (in accordance with the User's instructions), 
except the order may not remove liquidity from the COB or the Simple 
Book. The System cancels or rejects a Post Only market complex order 
unless it is subject to each exchange's drill-through protection.
    \15\ See Cboe Options Rule 5.6(c) in the shell Rulebook; see 
also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86173 (June 20, 2019), 84 
FR 30267 (June 26, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-027) (which filing added the 
Post Only order instruction to the shell Rulebook).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change moves the various other C-SAM Auction 
eligibility requirements to proposed paragraph (a) and makes 
nonsubstantive changes:
     The requirement that an Agency Order be in a class of 
options the Exchange designates as eligible for C-SAM Auctions moves 
from current Interpretation and Policy .01 to proposed subparagraph 
(a)(1).\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The proposed rule change deletes the provisions that the 
Agency Order be an order type, have a Capacity (currently referred 
to as origin code), or meet marketability criteria determined by the 
Exchange, as the current and proposed rule explicitly state any 
applicable eligibility parameters. The Exchange will announce all 
determinations it may make with respect to a C-SAM Auction pursuant 
to Rule 1.5 in the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The requirement that the Initiating TPH mark an Agency 
Order for C-SAM processing moves from current subparagraph (b)(1)(A) to 
proposed subparagraph (a)(2).
     The provision regarding the minimum size for Agency Orders 
moves from current Interpretation and Policy .03 to proposed 
subparagraph (a)(3) (the proposed rule change does not propose to amend 
the minimum size requirements. Additionally, the requirement that the 
Solicited Order be for the same size as the Agency Order moves from 
current subparagraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) to proposed subparagraph 
(a)(3).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The proposed rule change deletes the requirement that the 
Initiating TPH must designate the orders submitted into a C-SAM 
Auction as all-or-none (``AON''), as the C-SAM functionality will 
automatically handle any orders submitted to the Exchange on a C-SAM 
message as AON. Therefore, the proposed rule change indicates in 
proposed subparagraph (a)(3) that the System will handle each order 
submitted into a C-SAM Auction as AON.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The provision regarding the minimum increment for the 
Agency Order and Solicited Order price moves from current subparagraph 
(a)(3) to proposed subparagraph (a)(4).
    The proposed rule change also explicitly states that all of the 
eligibility requirements in proposed paragraph (a) must be met for a C-
SAM Auction to be initiated, and that the System rejects or cancels 
both an Agency Order and Solicited Order submitted to a C-SAM Auction 
that do not meet the conditions in proposed paragraph (a). This is 
consistent with current functionality, and the proposed rule change is 
merely adding this detail to the Rule.
    Proposed Rule 5.40(a) is the same as the corresponding paragraph 
for C-AIM Auctions in Rule 5.38(a) of the shell Rulebook, other than 
the minimum size requirement applicable to C-SAM Auctions.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Proposed paragraph (a) is also substantially the same as 
the corresponding eligibility requirements for simple SAM Auctions 
in Rule 5.39(a) of the shell Rulebook, except the proposed rule 
change does not provide that an Initiating TPH may not submit an 
Agency Order if the NBBO is crossed (unless the Agency Order is a 
SAM Sweep order). As noted above, there is no NBBO for complex 
orders, and the legs of complex orders are not subject to the 
restriction on NBBO trade-throughs. Additionally, the proposed rule 
change references the opening of the COB rather than the market 
open, as the opening of the COB is when complex orders may begin 
trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 5.40(b) sets forth the requirements for the stop 
price of the Agency Order. It states the Solicited Order must stop the 
entire Agency Order at a price that satisfies the following:
     If the Agency Order is to buy (sell) and (a) the 
applicable side of the BBO on any component of the complex strategy 
represents a Priority Customer order on the Simple Book, the stop price 
must be at least one minimum increment better than the SBB (SBO); or 
(b) the applicable side of the BBO on each component of the complex 
strategy represents a non-Priority Customer order or quote on the 
Simple Book, the stop price must be at or better than the SBB (SBO). 
This ensures the execution price of the Agency Order will improve the 
SBBO if there is a Priority Customer order in any of the legs on the 
Simple Book. The proposed rule change protects Priority Customers in 
any of the component legs of the Agency Order in the Simple Book. By 
permitting a Priority Customer Agency Order to trade at the SBBO if 
there is a resting non-Priority Customer order in the Book, the 
proposed rule change also protects Priority Customer orders submitted 
into a C-SAM Auction. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is 
consistent with general customer priority principles.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See also Rule 5.38(b)(1) of the shell Rulebook. General 
principles of customer priority ensure the execution price of 
complex orders will not be executed at prices inferior to the SBBO 
or at a price equal to the SBBO when there is a Priority Customer at 
the BBO for any component.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the Agency Order is to buy (sell) and a buy (sell) 
complex order rests on the COB, the stop price must be at least one 
minimum increment better than the bid (offer) of the resting complex 
order, unless the Agency Order is a Priority Customer order and the 
resting order is not a Priority Customer, in which case the stop price 
must be at or better than the bid (offer) of the resting complex order. 
This ensures the execution price of the Agency Order will improve the 
price of any resting Priority Customer complex orders on the COB, and 
that the execution price of a Priority Customer Agency Order will not 
be inferior to the price of any resting non-Priority Customer complex 
orders on the COB. The proposed rule change protects Priority Customers 
on the same side of the COB as the current rule does. By permitting a 
Priority Customer Agency Order to trade at the same price as a resting 
non-Priority Customer order, the proposed rule change also protects 
Priority Customer orders submitted into a C-SAM Auction. Application of 
this check at the initiation of a C-SAM Auction may result in the 
Agency Order executing at a better price, since the stop price must 
improve any same-side complex orders (with the exception of a Priority 
Customer Agency Order and a resting non-Priority Customer order 
described above). The proposed rule change is consistent with general 
customer priority principles.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See also Rule 5.38(b)(2) of the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the Agency Order is to buy (sell) and (a) the BBO of 
any component of the complex strategy represents a Priority Customer 
order on the Simple Book, the stop price must be at least one minimum 
increment better than the SBO (SBB), or (b) the BBO of each component 
of the complex strategy

[[Page 53512]]

represents a non-Priority Customer order on the Simple Book, the stop 
price must be at or better than the SBO (SBB). This ensures the 
execution price of the Agency Order will improve the price of any 
Priority Customer orders resting in the Simple Book at the opposite 
side of the SBBO, and not be through the opposite side of the SBBO.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See also Rule 5.38(b)(3) of the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the Agency Order is to buy (sell) and the best-priced 
sell (buy) complex order on the COB represents (a) a Priority Customer 
complex order, the stop price must be at least one minimum increment 
better than the SBO (SBB); or (b) a complex order that is not a 
Priority Customer, the stop price must be at or better than the price 
of the resting complex order. This ensures the execution price of the 
Agency Order will improve the price of any Priority Customer complex 
orders resting in the COB at the same price as the stop price, and not 
be through the price of any other complex order resting in the COB.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ There is no corresponding provision in Rule 5.38(b), 
because orders submitted into C-AIM auctions do not have AON 
contingencies, and Agency Orders submitted into those auctions may 
trade against both the contra-side order and other contra-side 
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These proposed price checks are consistent with the permissible 
execution prices as set forth in proposed paragraph (e), as described 
below.
    Proposed paragraph (c) describes the C-SAM Auction process. 
Pursuant to proposed subparagraph (c)(1), one or more C-SAM Auctions in 
the same complex strategy may occur at the same time. C-SAM Auctions in 
different complex strategies may be ongoing at any given time, even if 
the complex strategies have overlapping components. A C-SAM Auction may 
be ongoing at the same time as a SAM Auction in any component of the 
complex strategy.
    To the extent there is more than one C-SAM Auction in a complex 
strategy underway at a time, the C-SAM Auctions conclude sequentially 
based on the exact time each C-SAM Auction commenced, unless terminated 
early pursuant to proposed Rule 5.40(d). In the event there are 
multiple C-SAM Auctions underway that are each terminated early 
pursuant to proposed paragraph (d), the System processes the C-SAM 
Auctions sequentially based on the exact time each C-SAM Auction 
commenced. If the System receives a simple order that causes both a SAM 
Auction and C-SAM Auction (or multiple SAM and/or C-SAM Auctions) to 
conclude pursuant to proposed Rules 5.39(d) and 5.40(d), the System 
first processes SAM Auctions (in price-time priority) and then 
processes C-SAM Auctions (in price-time priority). At the time each C-
SAM Auction concludes, the System allocates the Agency Order pursuant 
to proposed paragraph (e) and takes into account all C-SAM Auction 
responses and unrelated orders in place at the exact time of 
conclusion.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See also Rule 5.38(c)(1) in the shell Rulebook (which also 
permits concurrent C-AIM Auctions for series with more than 50 
contracts to occur in the same manner); and Rule 5.39(c)(1) (which 
permits concurrent SAM Auctions to occur in the same manner, except 
the proposed change adds how the System will handle ongoing auctions 
that include an overlapping component (whether that component is the 
subject of an ongoing simple SAM Auction or part of a complex 
strategy for which a different C-SAM Auction is ongoing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it is appropriate to permit concurrent C-SAM 
Auctions in the same complex strategy for the same reasons it will 
permit concurrent C-AIM Auctions for larger-sized Agency Orders, and 
for the same reason it will permit concurrent simple SAM Auctions to 
occur. Different complex strategies are essentially different products, 
as orders in those strategies cannot interact, just as orders in 
different series or classes cannot interact. Similarly, while it is 
possible for a complex order to leg into the Simple Book, a complex 
order may only execute against simple orders if there is interest in 
each component in the appropriate ratio for the complex strategy. A 
simple order in one component of a complex strategy cannot on its own 
interact with a complex order in that complex strategy. Therefore, the 
Exchange believes it is appropriate to permit concurrent SAM and C-SAM 
Auctions that share a component. As proposed, C-SAM Auctions will 
ensure that Agency Orders execute at prices that protect Priority 
Customer orders in the Simple Book and that are not inferior to the 
SBBO at the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction, even when there are 
concurrent simple and complex auctions occurring. The proposed rule 
change sets forth how any SAM auctions with overlapping components will 
conclude if terminated due to the same event.
    The Exchange notes it is currently possible for auctions in a 
component leg and a complex strategy containing that component (such as 
a simple SAM Auction in the component and a complex order auction 
(``COA'') in the complex strategy that contains that component) to 
occur concurrently, and at the end of each auction, it is possible for 
interest resting in the Simple Book to trade against the complex order 
subject to the COA. While these auctions may be occurring at the same 
time, they will be processed in the order in which they are terminated 
(similar to how the System will process auctions as proposed above). In 
other words, suppose today there is a SAM Auction in a series and a COA 
in a complex strategy for which one of the components is the same 
series both occurring, which began and will terminate in that order, 
and each of which lasts 100 milliseconds. While it is possible for both 
auctions to terminate nearly simultaneously, the System will still 
process them in the order in which they terminate. When the SAM Auction 
terminates, the System will process it in accordance with current Rule 
6.74B (Rule 5.39 in the shell Rulebook), and the auctioned order may 
trade against any resting interest (and responses submitted to that SAM 
Auction, which may only trade against the order auctioned in that SAM 
current Rule 6.74B, or the contra-side order submitted to the SAM 
Auction (Rule 5.39 in the shell Rulebook)). The System will then 
process the COA Auction when it terminates, and the auctioned order may 
trade against any resting interest, including any simple interest that 
did not execute against the SAM order (in addition to the contra-side 
order and responses submitted to that COA Auction, which may only trade 
against the order auctioned in that COA), pursuant to current Rule 
6.53C.
    The proposed rule change moves and makes nonsubstantive changes to 
other provisions regarding the C-SAM Auction process to proposed 
paragraph (c):
     The proposed rule change moves the provision regarding the 
C-SAM Auction notification message (currently called a request for 
responses (``RFR'')) from current subparagraph (b)(1)(B) to proposed 
subparagraph (c)(2). The proposed provision specifies that the message 
will detail the side, size, price, Capacity, Auction ID, and complex 
strategy of the Agency Order to all Users that elect to receive C-SAM 
Auction notification messages. This is consistent with the current RFR 
that is disseminated. The current rule states that the RFR states the 
price, side, and size of the Agency Order; the proposed rule change 
adds details regarding other information that is included in the 
notification messages. The proposed rule change also adds that C-SAM 
Auction notification messages are not included in OPRA, which is also 
consistent with current functionality.
     The proposed rule change moves the provision regarding the 
length of the C-SAM Auction period from current subparagraph (b)(1)(C) 
to proposed subparagraph (c)(3). The proposed rule

[[Page 53513]]

change makes no changes to the current range of permitted lengths of C-
SAM Auction periods.
     The proposed rule change clarifies in proposed Rule 
5.40(c)(4) that the Initiating TPH may not modify or cancel an Agency 
Order or Solicited Order after submission to a C-SAM Auction. This is 
consistent with current functionality, and the proposed rule change 
merely adds this detail to the Rules.
    The proposed rule change also moves all provisions regarding C-SAM 
Auction responses into proposed subparagraph (c)(5), as well as makes 
certain changes described below, as well as nonsubstantive changes:
     The proposed rule change moves the provision regarding 
which market participants may respond to C-SAM Auctions, as well as 
what must be specified in the responses (including price, size, side, 
and Auction ID) from current subparagraphs (b)(1)(B) and (C) to 
proposed subparagraph (c)(5). Currently, all TPHs may submit responses 
to an RFR, except response may not be entered for the account of an 
options market-maker from another options exchange. The Exchange 
proposes to permit all Users, except for the Initiating TPH (the 
response cannot have the same EFID as the Agency Order),\24\ to respond 
to C-SAM Auctions. By permitting additional participants to submit 
responses to C-SAM Auctions, the Exchange believes this may provide the 
opportunity for additional liquidity in these auctions, which could 
lead to additional price improvement opportunities. The proposed rule 
change adds that a C-SAM response may only participate in the C-SAM 
Auction with the Auction ID specified in the response. This is 
consistent with current functionality. The Exchange proposes to include 
this language given the above proposal that permits concurrent C-SAM 
Auctions in the same complex strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Exchange currently does not permit the Initiating TPH 
to respond to a C-SAM Auction, as that is the inconsistent with the 
purpose of the auction, which is to cross solicited interest, rather 
than facilitated interest. Similar to the restriction that the 
Solicited Order cannot be for the Initiating TPH, the Exchange 
currently enforces this restriction through surveillance. The 
Exchange proposes to add a systemic block, but will continue to 
conduct surveillance for oompliance with the rule that prevents the 
response from being for the Initiating TPH (so that a response 
cannot be used in place of a facilitation order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The proposed rule change moves the provision regarding the 
permissible minimum increment for C-SAM responses from current 
subparagraph (b)(1)(E) to proposed subparagraph (c)(5)(A), but makes no 
substantive changes.
     Proposed subparagraph (c)(5)(B) states that C-SAM buy 
(sell) responses are capped at the following prices that exist at the 
conclusion of the C-SAM Auction: (i) The better of the SBO (SBB) or the 
offer (bid) of a resting complex order at the top of the COB; or (ii) 
one minimum increment lower (higher) than the better of the SBO (SBB) 
or the offer (bid) of a resting complex order at the top of the COB if 
the BBO of any component of the complex strategy or the resting complex 
order, respectively, is a Priority Customer order. The System executes 
these C-SAM responses, if possible, at the most aggressive permissible 
price not outside the SBBO at the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction or 
price of the resting complex order. This will ensure the execution 
price is at or better than the SBBO (or better than the SBBO if any 
component is represented by a Priority Customer order) or prices of 
resting complex orders (or better than the best-priced resting complex 
order if represented by a Priority Customer complex order) at the end 
of the C-SAM Auction as set forth in proposed Rule 5.40(e). Therefore, 
as proposed, the price at which any response may be entered (and thus 
be executed) will ultimately not be through the SBBO or the best-priced 
resting orders on the COB at the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction.
     Proposed subparagraph (c)(5)(C) states a User may submit 
multiple C-SAM responses at the same or multiple prices to a C-SAM 
Auction. This is consistent with current functionality. Current Rule 
6.74B contains no restriction on how many responses a User may submit; 
the proposed rule change merely makes this explicit in the Rules. The 
proposed rule change also states for purposes of a C-SAM Auction, the 
System aggregates all of a User's complex orders on the COB and C-SAM 
responses for the same EFID at the same price. This (combined with the 
proposed size cap) will prevent a User from submitting multiple orders 
or responses at the same price to obtain a larger pro-rata share of the 
Agency Order.
     Proposed subparagraph (c)(5)(D) states the System caps the 
size of a C-SAM response, or the aggregate size of a User's complex 
orders on the COB and C-SAM responses for the same EFID at the same 
price, at the size of the Agency Order (i.e., the System ignores size 
in excess of the size of the Agency Order when processing the C-SAM 
Auction). This is consistent with current subparagraph (b)(1)(F), 
except the proposed rule change caps the aggregate size of a User's 
interest at the same price, rather than the size of an individual 
response. The Exchange believes this is reasonable to prevent a User 
from submitting an order or response with an extremely large size in 
order to obtain a larger pro-rata share of the Agency Order.
     Proposed subparagraph (c)(5)(E) states C-SAM responses 
must be on the opposite side of the market as the Agency Order, and the 
System rejects a C-SAM response on the same side of the market as the 
Agency Order. This is consistent with current functionality, and the 
proposed rule change merely adds this detail to the rules. 
Additionally, the Exchange believes this is reasonable given that the 
purpose of a C-SAM response is to trade against the Agency Order in the 
C-SAM Auction into which the C-SAM response was submitted.
     The provision that states C-SAM responses are not visible 
to C-SAM Auction participants or disseminated to OPRA moves from 
current subparagraph (b)(1)(D) to proposed subparagraph (c)(5)(F).
     The provision that states C-SAM responses may be cancelled 
moves from current subparagraph (b)(1)(G) to proposed subparagraph 
(c)(5)(G). The proposed rule change also clarifies that C-SAM responses 
may be modified (which is consistent with current functionality and 
merely clarified in the rules).
    Proposed Rule 5.40(c) is substantially similar to the corresponding 
provision applicable to C-AIM Auctions in Rule 5.38(c) of the shell 
Rulebook.
    Pursuant to proposed Rule 5.40(d), a C-SAM Auction concludes at the 
earliest to occur of the following times:
     The end of the C-SAM Auction period;
     upon receipt by the System of an unrelated non-Priority 
Customer complex order on the same side as the Agency Order that would 
post to the COB at a price better than the stop price;
     upon receipt by the System of an unrelated Priority 
Customer complex order on the same side as the Agency Order that would 
post to the COB at a price equal to or better than the stop price;
     upon receipt by the System of an unrelated non-Priority 
Customer order or quote that would post to the Simple Book and cause 
the SBBO on the same side as the Agency Order to be better than the 
stop price;
     upon receipt by the System of a Priority Customer order in 
any component of the complex strategy that would post to the Simple 
Book and cause the SBBO on the same side as the Agency Order to be 
equal to or better than the stop price;

[[Page 53514]]

     upon receipt by the System of a simple non-Priority 
Customer order that would cause the SBBO on the opposite side of the 
Agency Order to be better than the stop price, or a Priority Customer 
order that would cause the SBBO on the opposite side of the Agency 
Order to be equal to or better than the stop price;
     upon receipt by the System of an order that would case the 
SBBO to be a price not permissible under the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan 
or Regulation SHO, provided, however, that in such instance, the C-SAM 
Auction concludes without execution;
     the market close; and
     any time the Exchange halts trading in the complex 
strategy or any component of the complex strategy, provided, however, 
that in such instance, the C-SAM Auction concludes without execution.
    The proposed events that would cause a C-SAM Auction to conclude 
early are the same as those that would cause a C-AIM Auction to 
conclude early (as is currently the case).\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Rule 5.38(d) in the shell Rulebook and Rule 6.74B(b)(2) 
of the current Rulebook. The proposed events that will cause a C-SAM 
Auction to conclude early are also substantially as those that will 
cause a simple SAM Auction to conclude early, except they are based 
on the entry of simple or complex orders that impact the SBBO or the 
best available prices on the same side of the COB rather than the 
BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to conclude the C-SAM Auction in response to 
the incoming orders described above, as they would cause the SBBO or 
the best-priced complex order on the same side of the market as the 
Agency Order to be better priced than the stop price, or cause the stop 
price to be the same price as the SBBO with a Priority Customer order 
on the BBO for a component or a Priority Customer complex order on the 
COB. Similarly, the incoming orders described above would cause the 
opposite side SBBO to be at or better than the stop price. These events 
would create circumstances under which a C-SAM Auction would not have 
been initiated, and therefore, the Exchange believes it is appropriate 
to conclude a C-SAM Auction when they exist.
    Additionally, the proposed rule change would conclude a C-SAM 
Auction in response to an incoming order that would cause the SBBO to 
be at a price not permissible under the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan or 
Regulation SHO,\26\ and would conclude the C-SAM Auction without 
execution. This will ensure that the stock leg of a stock-option order 
submitted into a C-SAM Auction does not execute at a price not 
permissible under that plan or regulation. This is consistent with 
current C-SAM functionality to ensure that stock legs do not trade at 
prices not permissible under the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan or Regulation 
SHO, and the proposed rule change codifies this in the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See current Rule 6.53C, Interpretation and Policy .06(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 5.40(d)(2) states if the System receives an unrelated 
market or marketable limit complex order (against the SBBO or the best 
price of a complex order resting in the COB), including a Post Only 
complex order, on the opposite side of the market during a C-SAM 
Auction, the C-SAM Auction does not end early, and the System executes 
the order against interest outside the C-SAM Auction or posts the 
complex order to the COB. If contracts remain from the unrelated 
complex order at the time the C-SAM Auction ends, they may be allocated 
for execution against the Agency Order pursuant to proposed Rule 
5.40(e). Because these orders may have the opportunity to trade against 
the Agency Order following the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction, which 
execution must still be at or better than the SBBO and the best-priced 
complex orders on the COB, the Exchange does not believe it is 
necessary to cause a C-SAM Auction to conclude early in the event the 
Exchange receives such orders. This will provide more time for 
potential price improvement, and the unrelated complex order will have 
the opportunity to trade against the Agency Order in the same manner as 
all other contra-side interest.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ This is the same as the corresponding provision for C-AIM 
Auctions (see Rule 5.38(d)(2) in the shell Rulebook), and similar to 
the corresponding provision for simple SAM Auctions (see Rule 
5.39(d)(2) in the shell Rulebook).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the conclusion of a C-SAM Auction, the System will execute the 
Agency Order against the Solicited Order or contra-side complex 
interest in a substantially similar manner as it does today.\28\ The 
System will execute the Agency Order against the Solicited Order or 
contra-side complex interest (which includes complex orders on the COB 
and C-SAM responses) at the best price(s). Any execution price(s) must 
be at or between the SBBO and the best prices of any complex orders 
resting on each side of the COB at the conclusion of the C-SAM 
Auction.\29\ This is consistent with executions following a C-SAM 
Auction today, which must be consistent with complex order priority 
rules.\30\ Executions following a C-SAM Auction for a complex Agency 
Order are subject to the complex order price restrictions and priority 
in Rule 5.33(f)(2) of the shell Rulebook.\31\ The System cancels or 
rejects any unexecuted C-SAM response (or unexecuted portions) at the 
conclusion of the C-SAM Auction, which is consistent with current 
functionality and the provision above, which provides that responses 
may only execute in the C-SAM Auction into which they are submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Rule 5.38(e).
    \29\ Additionally, if there is a Priority Customer order 
representing any leg of the SBBO in the Simple Book, the execution 
price must be better than the SBBO, in accordance with complex order 
priority. See Rule 5.33(f)(2) in the shell Rulebook. Additionally, 
any execution price must be better than the price of any resting 
Priority Order complex order on the COB. As further discussed below, 
as proposed, an execution may only occur at such a price.
    \30\ See current Rule 6.74B(2)(A)(I) (which refers to the NBBO, 
but is applied as SBBO with respect to complex orders) and 
Interpretation and Policy .01; see also current Rule 6.53C(d) and 
Interpretation and Policy .06.
    \31\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e)(4) and current Rule 6.74B, 
Interpretation and Policy .01. Pursuant to Rule 5.33(f)(2) in the 
shell Rulebook, the System will not execute a complex order at a net 
price (i) that would cause any component of the complex strategy to 
be executed at a price of zero; (ii) worse than the SBBO or equal to 
the SBBO when there is a Priority Customer Order at the SBBO, except 
AON complex orders may only execute at prices better than the SBBO; 
(iii) that would cause any component of the complex strategy to be 
executed at a price worse than the individual component prices on 
the Simple Book; (iv) worse than the price that would be available 
if the complex order Legged into the Simple Book; or (v) that would 
cause any component of the complex strategy to be executed at a 
price ahead of a Priority Customer Order on the Simple Book without 
improving the BBO of at least one component of the complex strategy. 
The proposed execution provisions for C-SAM Auctions are consistent 
with this priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency Order will execute against the Solicited Order if there 
are no Priority Customer complex orders resting on the COB on the 
opposite side of the Agency Order at or better than the stop price and 
the aggregate size of contra-side interest at an improved price(s) is 
insufficient to satisfy the Agency Order.\32\ The System will execute 
the Agency Order against contra-side interest (and will cancel the 
Solicited Order) if (a) there is a Priority Customer complex order 
resting on the COB on the opposite side of the Agency Order at or 
better than the stop price and the aggregate size of that order and 
other contra-side interest is sufficient to satisfy the Agency Order or 
(b) the aggregate size of contra-side interest at an improve price(s) 
is sufficient to satisfy the Agency Order.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e)(1) and current Rule 
6.74B(b)(2)(A).
    \33\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e)(2) and current Rule 
6.74B(b)(2)(A)(II) and (III). The Agency Order will execute against 
contra-side interest at each price level first against Priority 
Customer complex orders on the COB (in time priority) and then 
against remaining contra-side interest in a pro-rata manner.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 53515]]

    The System will cancel an Agency Order and Solicited Order with no 
execution if:
     Execution of the Agency Order against the Solicited Order 
would not be (1) at or between the SBBO at the conclusion of the SAM 
Auction; (2) better than the SBBO if there is a Priority Customer order 
in any leg component in the Simple Book; (3) at or better than the 
best-priced complex resting on the COB; or (4) better than the best-
priced complex order resting on the COB if it is a Priority Customer 
complex order;
     there is a Priority Customer complex order resting on the 
COB on the opposite side of the Agency Order at or better than the stop 
price, and the aggregate size of the Priority Customer complex order 
and any other contra-side interest is insufficient to satisfy the 
Agency Order; or
     there is a non-Priority Customer complex order resting on 
the COB on the opposite side of the Agency Order at a price better than 
the stop price, and the aggregate size of the resting complex order and 
any other contra-side interest is insufficient to satisfy the Agency 
Order.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e)(3) and current Rule 
6.74B(b)(2)(A)(I) and (II).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Unlike today, the Agency Order will only execute against the 
Solicited Order or C-SAM responses and complex orders resting in the 
COB, and will not leg into the Simple Book, at the conclusion of a C-
SAM Auction. As proposed, the execution prices for an Agency Order will 
always be better than the SBBO existing at the conclusion of the C-SAM 
Auction if it includes a Priority Customer order on any leg, as well as 
better than the best-priced complex order resting on the COB if it is a 
Priority Customer complex order, and thus is consistent with general 
customer priority principles with respect to complex orders, pursuant 
to which complex orders may only trade against complex interest at 
prices that improve the BBO of any component that is represented by a 
Priority Customer order.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Simple Book and the COB are separate, and orders on each do not 
interact unless a complex order legs into the Simple Book. As a result, 
the System is not able to calculate the aggregate size of complex 
auction responses and complex orders on the COB and the size of simple 
orders in the legs that comprise the complex strategy at each potential 
execution price (as executions may occur at multiple prices) prior to 
execution of an order following an auction for complex orders. The 
current priority following a C-SAM Auction provides that the System 
will first execute the complex order against all interest in the Simple 
Book, and then against interest in the COB.\36\ If the Exchange were to 
permit legging into the Simple Book following a C-SAM Auction in 
accordance with the complex order allocation that will be in place 
following the technology migration, the System would first look to 
determine whether there are Priority Customer orders resting in the 
Simple Book at the final auction price(s) (and in the applicable 
ratio), and whether there was sufficient interest at improved prices to 
satisfy the Agency Order. The System would then look back at C-SAM 
responses and complex orders resting in the COB to determine whether 
there is interest at that price level that could execute against the 
Agency Order. Finally, the System would then look back at the Simple 
Book to determine whether any non-Priority Customer orders in the legs 
are able to trade against the Agency Order. The System would need to do 
this at each price level, and then determine whether there were any 
Priority Customer orders resting on the Simple Book that are part of 
the SBBO or COB at the stop price, and determine whether there was 
sufficient size at improved prices, or sufficient size with any 
Priority Customer orders at the stop price, to satisfy the Agency 
Order.
    The amount of aggregate interest available to execute against the 
Agency Order is relevant in a C-SAM Auction with respect to the 
allocation of contracts against the Agency Order and other interest 
because of the all-or-none nature of the Agency Order. Because the 
System will not be able to determine the aggregate size of contra-side 
interest (including simple and complex) at improved prices, it would 
not be able to determine whether the Agency Order would execute against 
the Solicited Order or other contra-side interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See current Rule 6.74B, Interpretation and Policy .01; see 
also current Rule 6.53C(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes there would be significant technical 
complexities associated with reprogramming priority within the System 
to permit Agency Orders to leg into the Simple Book following a C-SAM 
Auction and allocate the Agency Order in a manner consistent with 
standard priority principles and crossing auctions, while making the 
most crossing functionality available to TPHs. The proposed rule change 
will ensure the Agency Order executes in accordance with the C-SAM 
allocation principles, which provide Priority Customers with priority 
over the Solicited Order (and other contra-side interest) but also 
provide for the Solicited Order to execute against the Agency Order if 
there is no price improvement and no Priority Customer interest 
present. The Exchange believes providing this functionality will 
encourage TPHs to submit large complex orders into C-SAM Auctions and 
provide customer orders with opportunities for price improvement. It 
will also ensure orders (including Priority Customer orders) on the 
Simple Book are protected in accordance with standard complex order 
priority principles, as an Agency Order will only be permitted to 
execute at prices that do not trade at the SBBO existing at the 
conclusion of the C-SAM Auction if it includes a Priority Customer 
order on any leg, and that do not trade through the SBBO existing at 
the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction.
    As noted above, the stop price of the Agency Order must be better 
than the same and opposite side of the SBBO if there is a Priority 
Customer order at the BBO in any component of the complex strategy. 
Additionally, the stop price must be better than the price of any 
Priority Customer order resting at the top of the COB on either side of 
the Agency Order. Further, a C-SAM Auction concludes upon receipt of an 
unrelated Priority Customer order in any component of the complex 
strategy that would post to the Simple Book and cause the SBBO on 
either side of the Agency Order to be equal to or better than the stop 
price, or upon the receipt of an unrelated Priority Customer complex 
order on either side of the Agency Order that post to the COB with a 
price equal to or better than the stop price. Additionally, any 
execution prices at the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction are subject to 
the standard complex order priority, which will ensure an Agency Order 
must execute at a price that improves the SBBO if there is a Priority 
Customer order at the BBO in any leg.\37\ Therefore, the proposed rule 
change protects Priority Customer orders in the Simple Book even though 
Agency Orders may not leg into the Simple Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ If there was a Priority Customer order resting at the BBO 
in any leg of a complex strategy in the Simple Book, and a complex 
order was submitted to the Exchange (outside of a C-SAM Auction) 
with a price one minimum increment better than the SBBO, that 
complex order would not be able to execute against interest in the 
leg markets (including the Priority Customer order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 5.40, Interpretations and Policies .01 and .02 are 
the same as current Rule 6.74B, Interpretations and Policies .02 and 
.03, which currently

[[Page 53516]]

apply to C-SAM Auctions for complex orders.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ These provisions are also virtually identical to the ones 
applicable to simple SAM Auctions. See Rule 5.39, Interpretations 
and Policies .01 and .02 in the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with 
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and 
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, 
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\39\ Specifically, the 
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
Section 6(b)(5) \40\ 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) \41\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be 
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, 
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's C-SAM will function in a substantially similar 
manner following the technology migration as it does today. The 
proposed rule change clarifies in the Rules that the Solicited Order 
may be comprised of multiple contra-party orders will benefit 
investors. Permitting the Solicited Order to be comprised of multiple 
contra-party orders may increase the opportunity for customers to have 
orders participate in a C-SAM Auction. As a result, this may increase 
opportunities for price improvement, because this will increase the 
liquidity available for the Solicited Order, which is consistent with 
the purpose of C-SAM Auctions. The Exchange believes that this is 
beneficial to participants because allowing multiple contra-parties 
should foster competition for filling the Solicited Order and thereby 
result in potentially better prices, as opposed to only allowing one 
contra-party and, thereby requiring that contra-party to do a larger 
size order which could result in a worse price for the trade.
    The proposed rule change to prohibit Initiating TPHs from 
designating an Agency Order or Solicited Order as Post Only is 
appropriate, as the purpose of a Post Only order is to not execute upon 
entry and instead rest in the Book, while the purpose of a C-SAM 
Auction is to receive an execution following the Auction but prior to 
entering the COB.
    The proposed rule change to require the stop price to be at least 
one minimum increment better than the best-priced complex order in the 
COB, unless the Agency Order is a Priority Customer order and the 
resting order is not a Priority Customer, in which case the stop price 
must be at or better than the price of the complex order will protect 
investors. It will protect Priority Customer orders on the same side of 
the COB. By permitting a Priority Customer Agency Order to trade at the 
same price as a resting non-Priority Customer order, the proposed rule 
change also protects Priority Customer orders submitted into a C-SAM 
Auction. Additionally, application of this check at the initiation of a 
C-SAM Auction may result in the Agency Order executing at a better 
price, since the stop price must improve any same-side orders (with the 
exception of a Priority Customer Agency Order and a resting non-
Priority Customer order described above). The proposed rule change is 
consistent with general customer priority principles.
    As noted above, the proposed rule change will allow C-SAM Auctions 
to occur concurrently with other C-SAM Auctions. Although C-SAM 
Auctions will be allowed to overlap, the Exchange does not believe that 
this raises any issues that are not addressed by the proposed rule 
change. For example, although overlapping, each C-SAM Auction will be 
started in a sequence and with a time that will determine its 
processing. Thus, even if there are two C-SAM Auctions that commence 
and conclude, at nearly the same time, each C-SAM Auction will have a 
distinct conclusion at which time the Auction will be allocated. In 
turn, when the first C-SAM Auction concludes, unrelated orders that 
then exist will be considered for participation in the Auction. If 
unrelated orders are fully executed in such C-SAM Auction, then there 
will be no unrelated orders for consideration when the subsequent 
Auction is processed (unless new unrelated order interest has arrived). 
If instead there is remaining unrelated order interest after the first 
C-SAM Auction has been allocated, then such unrelated order interest 
will be considered for allocation when the subsequent Auction is 
processed. As another example, each C-SAM response is required to 
specifically identify the Auction for which it is targeted and if not 
fully executed will be cancelled back at the conclusion of the Auction. 
Thus, C-SAM responses will be specifically considered only in the 
specified Auction.
    The proposed rule change to allow multiple auctions to overlap is 
consistent with functionality already in place on other exchanges.\42\ 
Different complex strategies are essentially different products--orders 
in different strategies cannot interact, just as orders in different 
classes or series cannot interact. Therefore, the Exchange believes 
concurrent C-SAM Auctions in different complex strategies is 
appropriate. Additionally, while it is possible for a complex order to 
leg into the Simple Book, a complex order may only execute against 
simple orders if there is interest in each component in the ratio of 
the complex strategy. A simple order in one component of a complex 
strategy cannot on its own interact with a complex order in that 
complex strategy. Therefore, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to 
permit concurrent C-SAM Auctions in the same component. As proposed, C-
SAM Auctions will ensure that Agency Orders execute at prices that 
protect Priority Customer orders in the Simple Book and that are not 
inferior to the SBBO, even when there are concurrent Auctions 
occurring. The proposed rule change sets forth how any Auctions with in 
overlapping complex strategies overlapping components will conclude if 
terminated due to the same event. The Rules do not currently prevent a 
COA in a complex strategy from occurring at the same time as an SAM in 
one of the components of the complex strategy. Therefore, the Exchange 
believes it is similarly reasonable to permit multiple C-SAM in a 
complex strategy to occur at the same time as a SAM in one of the 
components of the complex strategy. The Exchange believes this new 
functionality may lead to an increase in Exchange volume and should 
allow the Exchange to better compete against other markets that permit 
overlapping price improvement auctions, while providing an opportunity 
for price improvement for Agency Orders and assuring that Priority 
Customers on the simple Book and COB are protected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See, e.g., EDGX Options Rule 21.21(c)(1); see also, e.g., 
ISE Rule Options 3, Section 11(g); and Boston Options Exchange LLC 
(``BOX'') Rule 7270 and BOX IM-7150-3. The Exchange will also have 
rules that other auctions to occur concurrently following the 
technology migration. See, e.g., Rules 5.37(c)(1), 5.38(c)(1), and 
5.39(c)(1) of the shell Rulebook (which will permit concurrent AIM, 
C-AIM, and SAM Auctions, respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed events that will conclude a C-SAM Auction are 
reasonable and promote a fair and

[[Page 53517]]

orderly market and national market system, because they will ensure 
that executions at the conclusion of an Auction occur at permissible 
prices (such as not outside the SBBO (and not at the SBBO if there is a 
Priority Customer order in any component on the Simple Book) and not at 
the same price as a Priority Customer order on the COB). The proposed 
rule change will also benefit investors by providing clarity regarding 
what will cause a C-SAM Auction to conclude. These events would create 
circumstances under which a C-SAM Auction would not have been permitted 
to start, or that would cause the auction price no longer be consistent 
with the permissible prices at which executions at the conclusion of an 
Auction may occur. Thus the Exchange believes it is appropriate to 
conclude a C-SAM Auction if those circumstances occur. The Exchange 
will no longer conclude a C-SAM Auction early due to the receipt of an 
opposite side complex order other than one proposed instance. The 
Exchange believes this promotes just and equitable principles of trade, 
because these orders may have the opportunity to trade against the 
Agency Order following the conclusion of the Auction, which execution 
must still be at or better than the SBBO, as well as prices of complex 
orders in the COB. The Exchange believes this will protect investors, 
because it will provide more time for price improvement, and the 
unrelated order will have the opportunity to trade against the Agency 
Order in the same manner as all other contra-side complex interest.
    Executions following the conclusion of a C-SAM Auction will occur 
in a substantially similar manner as they do today, except the Agency 
Order may not leg into the simple market to trade against simple orders 
in the legs. Pursuant Rule 5.33 in the shell Rulebook (which will 
govern the electronic trading of complex orders following the 
migration), if an order is able to leg into the Simple Book, the System 
would first execute an order against Priority Customer orders in the 
Simple Book, then against any complex order interest in the COB (or 
auction responses), and last against any other simple interest in the 
Simple Book (with executions against the Simple Book occurring in the 
applicable ratio). This would occur at each price at which the complex 
order may execute. Requiring the System to make these determinations by 
going ``back and forth'' between the Simple Book and the COB at 
multiple price levels would be more complicated after a C-SAM Auction. 
The System must determine the aggregate amount of interest available at 
each execution price level before executing any portion of the Agency 
Order to determine the final auction price and how to allocate the 
Agency Order against contra-side interest at the conclusion of a C-SAM 
Auction. This is necessary because the System must determine at each 
price level the aggregate non-Priority Customer interest to determine 
whether there is sufficient size of contra-side interest at improved 
prices and thus whether the Agency Order will execute against the 
Solicited Order or contra-side interest.
    As noted above, there would be significant technical complexities 
associated with reprogramming priority within the System to permit 
Agency Orders to leg into the Simple Book following a C-SAM Auction 
\43\ and allocate the Agency Order in a manner consistent with standard 
priority principles and crossing auctions, while making the most 
crossing functionality available to TPHs. Pursuant to the complex order 
priority principles in Rule 5.33(f)(2) in the shell Rulebook, if an 
order is able to leg into the Simple Book, the System first executes an 
order against Priority Customer orders in the Simple Book, then against 
any complex order interest in the COB (or auction responses), and last 
against any other simple interest in the Simple Book (with executions 
against the Simple Book occurring in the applicable ratio). This occurs 
at each price at which the complex order may execute. Requiring the 
System to make these determinations by going ``back and forth'' between 
the Simple Book and the COB at multiple price levels is more 
complicated after a C-SAM Auction. The System must determine the 
aggregate amount of interest available at each execution price level 
before determining whether the Agency Order will execute against the 
Solicited Order or contra-side complex interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ The Exchange notes AON complex orders will not be able to 
leg into the Simple Book due to the same technical complexities. See 
Rule 5.33 in the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change 
protects Priority Customer orders on the Simple Book, because 
executions following a C-SAM Auction will be subject to the general 
complex order priority \44\ that will apply to all executions of all 
complex orders on the Exchange. It ensures an Agency Order will only 
execute at prices better than the SBBO existing at the conclusion of 
the C-SAM Auction if there is a Priority Customer order at the BBO on 
any leg, and at prices equal to or better than the SBBO existing at the 
conclusion of the C-SAM Auction if there is no Priority Customer order 
at the BBO on any leg. The proposed allocation will also ensure the 
Agency Order does not trade at the same price as a Priority Customer 
complex order resting on the COB or through the best-priced complex 
orders on the COB, and will protect investors by providing Priority 
Customer complex orders with priority at each price level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e)(4) and current Rule 6.74B, 
Interpretation and Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the infrequency with which complex orders currently leg into 
the Simple Book, the Exchange believes it is in the best interest of 
investors to not implement additional technical complexities given the 
expected minimal impact, if any, that not permitting Agency Orders to 
leg into the Simple Book following a C-SAM Auction would have on 
execution opportunities for orders in the Simple Book.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ The Exchange notes the complex order crossing auction of at 
least one other options exchange does not leg agency orders into the 
simple book at the conclusion of the auction as long as there is 
price improvement over the equivalent of the SBBO for that exchange. 
See, e.g., American Rule 971.2NY(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change to permit all Users to respond to C-SAM 
Auctions will benefit investors, because it may result in more Users 
having the opportunity to participate in executions at C-SAM Auctions, 
which may lead to more opportunities to price improvement. The Exchange 
believes the proposed rule change will remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market 
system, because other exchanges permit all market participants to 
respond to similar price improvement auctions.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See, e.g., EDGX Options Rule 21.21(c)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule changes that add detail to 
the Rules, which are consistent with current functionality, will remove 
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and 
protect investors, as these changes provide transparency in the Rules 
regarding C-SAM Auctions. Additionally, the proposed rule change aligns 
rule language with corresponding provisions in the Exchange's other 
complex order price improvement crossing mechanism in Rule 5.38 of the 
shell Rulebook.
    The proposed rule change is also consistent with Section 11(a)(1) 
of the Act \47\ and the rules promulgated

[[Page 53518]]

thereunder. Generally, Section 11(a)(1) of the Act restricts any member 
of a national securities exchange from effecting any transaction on 
such exchange for (i) the member's own account, (ii) the account of a 
person associated with the member, or (iii) an account over which the 
member or a person associated with the member exercises investment 
discretion (collectively, referred to as ``covered accounts''), unless 
a specific exemption is available. Examples of common exemptions 
include the exemption for transactions by broker dealers acting in the 
capacity of a market maker under Section 11(a)(1)(A),\48\ the ``G'' 
exemption for yielding priority to non-members under Section 
11(a)(1)(G) of the Act and Rule 11a1-1(T) thereunder,\49\ and ``Effect 
vs. Execute'' exemption under Rule 11a2-2(T) under the Act.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 15 U.S.C. 78k(a). Section 11(a)(1) prohibits a member of a 
national securities exchange from effecting transactions on that 
exchange for its own account, the account of an associated person, 
or an account over which it or its associated person exercises 
discretion unless an exception applies.
    \48\ 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1)(A).
    \49\ 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1)(G) and 17 CFR 240.11a1-1(T).
    \50\ 17 CFR 240.11a2-2(T).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``Effect vs. Execute'' exemption permits an exchange member, 
subject to certain conditions, to effect transactions for covered 
accounts by arranging for an unaffiliated member to execute 
transactions on the exchange. To comply with Rule 11a2-2(T)'s 
conditions, a member: (i) Must transmit the order from off the exchange 
floor; (ii) may not participate in the execution of the transaction 
once it has been transmitted to the member performing the execution; 
\51\ (iii) may not be affiliated with the executing member; and (iv) 
with respect to an account over which the member has investment 
discretion, neither the member nor its associated person may retain any 
compensation in connection with effecting the transaction except as 
provided in the Rule. For the reasons set forth below, the Exchange 
believes that TPHs entering orders into a C-SAM would satisfy the 
requirements of Rule 11a2-2(T).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ The member may, however, participate in clearing and 
settling the transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the context of automated trading systems, the Commission has 
found that the off-floor transmission requirement is met if a covered 
account order is transmitted from a remote location directly to an 
exchange's floor by electronic means.\52\ Because the Exchange's C-SAM 
Auction receives, and will continue to receive, orders from TPHs 
electronically through remote terminals or computer-to-computer 
interfaces, the Exchange believes that orders (as well as responses) 
submitted to the C-SAM Auction from off the Exchange's trading floor 
will satisfy the off-floor transmission requirement.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 61419 
(January 26, 2010), 75 FR 5157 (February 1, 2010) (SR-BATS-2009-031) 
(approving BATS options trading); 59154 (December 23, 2008), 73 FR 
80468 (December 31, 2008) (SR-BSE-2008-48) (approving equity 
securities listing and trading on BSE); 57478 (March 12, 2008), 73 
FR 14521 (March 18, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-004 and SR-NASDAQ-2007-
080) (approving NOM options trading); 53128 (January 13, 2006), 71 
FR 3550 (January 23, 2006) (File No. 10-131) (approving The Nasdaq 
Stock Market LLC); 44983 (October 25, 2001), 66 FR 55225 (November 
1, 2001) (SR-PCX-00-25) (approving Archipelago Exchange); 29237 (May 
24, 1991), 56 FR 24853 (May 31, 1991) (SR-NYSE-90-52 and SR-NYSE-90-
53) (approving NYSE's Off-Hours Trading Facility); and 15533 
(January 29, 1979), 44 FR 6084 (January 31, 1979) (``1979 
Release'').
    \53\ A TPH may not enter an order for a covered account from on 
the trading floor and rely on the Effect v. Execute, and therefore 
another exception must apply. A TPH may not send an order for a 
covered account for an affiliated TPH on the floor and rely on the 
Effect v. Execute, and therefore another exception must apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second condition of Rule 11a2-2(T) requires that neither a 
member nor an associated person of such member participate in the 
execution of its order once [sic]. The Exchange represents that, upon 
submission to the C-SAM Auction, an order or C-SAM response will be 
executed automatically pursuant to the rules set forth for C-SAM 
Auctions. In particular, execution of an order (including the Agency 
and Solicited Order) or a C-SAM response sent to the mechanism depends 
not on the TPH entering the order or response, but rather on what other 
orders and responses are present and the priority of those orders and 
responses. Thus, at no time following the submission of an order or 
response is a TPH or associated person of such TPH able to acquire 
control or influence over the result or timing of order or response 
execution.\54\ Once the Agency Order and Solicited Order, or the 
response, as applicable, have been transmitted, the Initiating TPH that 
transmitted the orders, or the User that submitted the response, 
respectively, will not participate in the execution of the Agency Order 
or Solicited Order, or the response, respectively. No TPH, including 
the Initiating TPH, will see a C-SAM response submitted into C-SAM, and 
therefore and will not be able to influence or guide the execution of 
their Agency Orders, Solicited Orders, or C-SAM responses, as 
applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ An Initiating TPH may not cancel or modify an Agency Order 
or Solicited Order after it has been submitted into C-SAM, but Users 
may modify or cancel their responses after being submitted into a C-
SAM. See proposed Rule 5.40(c)(4) and (c)(5)(G). The Exchange notes 
that the Commission has stated that the non-participation 
requirement does not preclude members from cancelling or modifying 
orders, or from modifying instructions for executing orders, after 
they have been transmitted so long as such modifications or 
cancellations are also transmitted from off the floor. See 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 14563 (March 14, 1978), 43 FR 
11542, 11547 (the ``1978 Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 11a2-2(T)'s third condition requires that the order be 
executed by an exchange member who is unaffiliated with the member 
initiating the order. The Commission has stated that the requirement is 
satisfied when automated exchange facilities, such as the C-SAM Auction 
are used, as long as the design of these systems ensures that members 
do not possess any special or unique trading advantages in handling 
their orders after transmitting them to the exchange.\55\ The Exchange 
represents that the C-SAM Auction is designed so that no TPH has any 
special or unique trading advantage in the handling of its orders or 
responses after transmitting its orders to the mechanism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ In considering the operation of automated execution systems 
operated by an exchange, the Commission noted that, while there is 
not an independent executing exchange member, the execution of an 
order is automatic once it has been transmitted into the system. 
Because the design of these systems ensures that members do not 
possess any special or unique trading advantages in handling their 
orders after transmitting them to the exchange, the Commission has 
stated that executions obtained through these systems satisfy the 
independent execution requirement of Rule 11a2-2(T). See 1979 
Release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A TPH (not acting in a market-maker capacity) could submit an order 
for a covered account from off of the Exchange's trading floor to an 
unaffiliated Floor Broker for submission for execution in the C-SAM 
Auction from the Exchange's trading floor and satisfy the effect-
versus-execute exemption (assuming the other conditions are 
satisfied).\56\ However, a TPH could not submit an order for a covered 
account to its ``house'' Floor Broker on the trading floor for 
execution and rely on this exemption. Because a TPH may not rely on the 
``G'' exemption when submitting an order to a C-SAM Auction,\57\ it 
would need to ensure another exception applies in this situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Orders for covered accounts that rely on the ``effect 
versus execute'' exemption in this scenario must be transmitted from 
a remote location directly to the Floor Broker on the trading floor 
by electronic means.
    \57\ See proposed Rule 5.40(e) (which describes the allocation 
of the Agency Order at the conclusion of the C-SAM Auction, which 
does not prioritize non-TPH broker-dealers, as would be required by 
the ``G'' exemption).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 11a2-2(T)'s fourth condition requires that, in the case of a 
transaction effected for an account with respect to which the 
initiating member or an

[[Page 53519]]

associated person thereof exercises investment discretion, neither the 
initiating member nor any associated person thereof may retain any 
compensation in connection with effecting the transaction, unless the 
person authorized to transact business for the account has expressly 
provided otherwise by written contract referring to Section 11(a) of 
the Act and Rule 11a2-2(T) thereunder.\58\ The Exchange recognizes that 
TPHs relying on Rule 11a2-2(T) for transactions effected through the C-
SAM Auction must comply with this condition of the Rule and the 
Exchange will enforce this requirement pursuant to its obligations 
under Section 6(b)(1) of the Act to enforce compliance with federal 
securities laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See 17 CFR 240.11a2-2(T)(a)(2)(iv). In addition, Rule 11a2-
2(T)(d) requires a member or associated person authorized by written 
contract to retain compensation, in connection with effecting 
transactions for covered accounts over which such member or 
associated persons thereof exercises investment discretion, to 
furnish at least annually to the person authorized to transact 
business for the account a statement setting forth the total amount 
of compensation retained by the member in connection with effecting 
transactions for the account during the period covered by the 
statement which amount must be exclusive of all amounts paid to 
others during that period for services rendered to effect such 
transactions. See also 1978 Release, at 11548 (stating ``[t]he 
contractual and disclosure requirements are designed to assure that 
accounts electing to permit transaction-related compensation do so 
only after deciding that such arrangements are suitable to their 
interests'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the instant proposal is consistent with 
Rule 11a2-2(T), and that therefore the exception should apply in this 
case. Therefore, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is 
consistent with Section 11(a) of the Act and the Rules thereunder.
    The proposed rule change is generally intended to align certain 
system functionality currently offered by Cboe Options to the 
Exchange's System in order to provide a consistent technology offering 
for the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. A consistent technology offering, in 
turn, will simplify the technology implementation, changes and 
maintenance by Users of the Exchange that are also participants on Cboe 
Affiliated Exchanges. This will provide Users with greater 
harmonization of price improvement auction mechanisms available among 
the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges.

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 does not 
believe the proposed rule change to permit all Users to respond to C-
SAM Auctions will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is 
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, 
because it will permit more types of market participants (i.e., all 
Users) to submit responses to C-SAM Auctions. This may result in more 
Users having the opportunity to participate in executions at the 
conclusion of C-SAM Auctions. The Exchange does not believe the 
proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket competition 
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of 
the Act, because it may increase liquidity in C-SAM Auctions, which may 
lead to more opportunities to price improvement. Additionally, other 
exchanges permit all market participants to respond to similar price 
improvement auctions.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See, e.g., EDGX Options Rules 21.19(c)(5) and 21.21(c)(5); 
see also Rules 5.37(c)(5) and 5.38(c)(5) in the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change to amend the 
C-SAM Auction will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is 
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, 
as the proposed changes to the C-SAM Auction will apply to all orders 
submitted to an Auction in the same manner. C-SAM Auctions will 
continue to be voluntary for TPHs to use, and are available to all 
TPHs. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will 
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, because the 
proposed changes are substantially the same as another options 
exchange's rules. The general framework and primary features of the 
Exchange's current C-SAM Auction is not changing, and will continue to 
protect orders, including Priority Customer orders, resting in the Book 
and the COB.
    The proposed rule change will provide continued consistency across 
the Exchange's (and the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges', as applicable) 
price improvement mechanisms. The general framework and primary 
features of the proposed C-SAM Auction process (such as the eligibility 
requirements, auction response period, same-side stop price 
requirements, response requirements, and auction notification process), 
are substantively the same as the framework for the Exchange's AIM, C-
AIM, and SAM price improvement auctions, as recently proposed to be 
amended in connection with the Exchange's upcoming technology 
migration.\60\ Other exchanges have similar complex order solicitation 
auction mechanisms.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ See Rules 5.37 through 5.39 in the shell Rulebook.
    \61\ See, e.g., ISE Rule Options 3, Section 11(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 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 \62\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \63\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission 
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along 
with a brief description and 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. 
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the 
Act \64\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date 
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \65\ permits the 
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent 
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange 
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that 
the Exchange may implement the proposed rule change at the time of its 
anticipated October 7, 2019 system migration. The Exchange notes that 
the proposed rule change is substantially similar to the Exchange's C-
AIM Auction and SAM Auction (for simple orders) and similar to 
functionality on other options exchanges,\66\ and that the C-SAM 
Auction will function in a substantially similar manner following the 
technology migration as it does today. The Exchange believes waiver of 
the operative delay would permit the Exchange to continue to provide 
the C-SAM functionality to market

[[Page 53520]]

participants on a continuous, uninterrupted basis. For these reasons, 
the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is 
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and 
designates the proposal as operative upon filing.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \65\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \66\ See supra notes 60 and 61.
    \67\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, 
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on 
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 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-2019-064 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-2019-064. 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 such 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-CBOE-2019-064, and should be submitted 
on or before October 28, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-21724 Filed 10-4-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P