[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29762-29766]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12416]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-74989; File No. SR-MIAX-2015-36]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 515A
May 18, 2015.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on May 13, 2015, Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC (``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change as
described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by
the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
[[Page 29763]]
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 515A.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 515A, MIAX Price
Improvement Mechanism (``PRIME'') and PRIME Solicitation Mechanism, to
provide that in instances where an Initiating Member \3\ electronically
submits an order that it represents as agent (an ``Agency Order'') into
a PRIME Auction (``Auction''), which the Initiating Member is willing
to automatically match (``auto-match'') as principal, the price and
size of responses in the Auction to a Request for Response (``RFR
response'') \4\ up to an optional designated limit price and, at the
price point where the balance of the Agency Order can be fully executed
(the ``final auto-match price point'') \5\ there is only one competing
Member's response opposite the Agency Order, the Initiating Member may
be allocated up to fifty percent (50%) of the remainder of the Agency
Order. The Exchange also proposes to add language in Rule 515A to more
fully describe the manner in which any remaining contracts will be
allocated at the conclusion of an Auction, and to make other non-
substantive changes to Rule 515A to update terminology in the Rule.
This is a competitive filing that is substantially and materially based
on the price improvement auction rules of BOX Options Exchange, LLC
(``BOX),\6\ and the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (``CBOE'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Act. See Exchange
Rule 100.
\4\ See Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(i). When the Exchange receives
a properly designated Agency Order for auction processing, a Request
for Responses (``RFR'') detailing the option, side, size, and
initiating price will be sent to all subscribers of the Exchange's
data feeds. The RFR will last for 500 milliseconds. Members may
submit responses to the RFR (specifying prices and sizes). RFR
responses shall be an Auction or Cancel (``AOC'') order or an AOC
eQuote. Such responses cannot cross the disseminated MIAX Best Bid
or Offer (``MBBO'') on the opposite side of the market from the
response.
\5\ For clarity and ease of reference, the Exchange is proposing
to define such price point as the ``final auto-match price point''
in the rule text.
\6\ See BOX Rule 7150(h).
\7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74864 (May 4, 2015),
80 FR 26601 (May 8, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-043).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Exchange Rules 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H) and (I), upon
conclusion of an Auction, an Initiating Member will retain certain
priority and trade allocation privileges for an Agency Order that the
Initiating Member seeks to cross at a single price (a ``single-price
submission'') and for an Agency Order that the Initiating Member is
willing to auto-match. Under current Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), if the
best price equals the Initiating Member's single-price submission, the
Initiating Member's single-price submission shall be allocated the
greater of one contract or a certain percentage of the order, which
percentage will be determined by the Exchange and may not be larger
than 40%. However, if only one Member's response matches the Initiating
Member's single price submission then the Initiating Member may be
allocated up to 50% of the order.
Similarly, current Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) provides that
if the Initiating Member selected the auto-match option of the Auction,
the Initiating Member shall be allocated its full size of RFR responses
\8\ at each price point until the final auto-match price point is
reached. At the final auto-match price point, the Initiating Member
shall be allocated the greater of one contract or a certain percentage
of the remainder of the Agency Order,\9\ which percentage will be
determined by the Exchange and may not be larger than 40%. Notably,
unlike the single-price submission rules in Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H),
current Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) provides that an Initiating Member
would only be entitled to receive an allocation of up to 40% for orders
that are matched at the final auto-match price point regardless of the
number of Member responses that match the Initiating Member's auto-
match submission at the final auto-match price point, even when matched
by only one competing Member's response. The Exchange believes this
result to be inconsistent within the Rules and believes that Initiating
Members that price orders more aggressively using the auto-match option
should receive allocations at least equal to those that select a
single-price submission option for an Auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ When the Exchange receives a properly designated Agency
Order for auction processing, a Request for Responses (``RFR'')
detailing the option, side, size, and initiating price will be sent
to all subscribers of the Exchange's data feeds. The RFR will last
for 500 milliseconds. Members may submit responses to the RFR
(specifying prices and sizes). See Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(i).
\9\ For further clarity and ease of reference, the Exchange is
proposing to amend the rule to refer to the ``Agency Order'' in the
rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) to provide
that if only one competing Member's response is present at the final
auto-match price point then the Initiating Member may be allocated up
to 50% of the remainder of the Agency Order at the final auto-match
price point. As discussed above, current Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I)
provides that an Initiating Member will receive an allocation of up to
40% for orders that are matched at the final auto-match price point
even when matched by only one competing Member's response. The Exchange
believes this result to be inconsistent within the Exchange's Rules and
believes that Initiating Members that price orders more aggressively
using the auto-match option should receive allocations at least equal
to those that select a single-price submission option. The Exchange
also believes the proposed rule change will more closely align the
language in Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) with the language in Rule
515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), and will thus provide additional internal
consistency within the Exchange's Rules by harmonizing order
allocations of single-price submissions and auto-match submissions in
instances where there is only one competing Member's response at the
final Auction price level. Furthermore, the proposed rule change will
bring the Exchange's PRIME rules in line with the Rules of other
competitor exchanges with which the Exchange competes for order flow.
The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change would not affect
the priority
[[Page 29764]]
of Priority Customers \10\ under Rule 515A(2)(iii)(B). Priority
Customers on the book would continue to have priority even in cases
where a Priority Customer order is resting on the book at the final
Auction price. For example, suppose that the National Best Bid
(``NBB'') for a particular option is $1.00 and the national best offer
for the option is $1.20, and that NBB is a Priority Customer order to
buy 10 contracts on MIAX. The minimum trading increment in the option
is $0.01. An Initiating Member submits an auto-match Agency Order to
sell 100 contracts in the series. The Auction begins, and one
responding Member submits a response to buy 50 contracts at $1.00. The
Auction then concludes. In this case, the Priority Customer on the book
would have priority and would be allocated 10 contracts, with the
remaining 90 contracts being allocated 40% to the Initiating Member and
60% to the responding Member.\11\ Thus, in this example, the Initiating
Member is entitled to receive 40%, or 36 of the remaining 90 contracts,
and the responding Member is entitled to receive up to 60%, or 54 of
the remaining 90 contracts, but is limited to its full size of 50
contracts. Then the Initiating Member would be allocated the remaining
4 contracts (for a total of 40 to the Initiating Member), because the
Initiating Member has guaranteed the entire size of the Agency Order
and there are no other matching participants respecting the remaining 4
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial accounts(s). See
Exchange Rule 100.
\11\ Although the Priority Customer order has been filled in its
entirety, the System currently allocates the remaining 90 contracts
as though there are still two participants (the already-filled
Priority Customer, together with the responding Member) matching the
Initiating Member at the final Auction price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, a Priority Customer order resting on the book at a final
Auction price level that is worse than the best Member response will
also retain priority in the book. For example, assume again that the
NBB for a particular option is $1.00 and the NBO for the option is
$1.20 and that the NBB is a Priority Customer order to buy 10 contracts
at MIAX. The minimum increment in the option series is $0.01. An
Initiating Member submits an auto-match Agency Order to sell 100
contracts in the series. The Auction begins and during the Auction, one
responding Market Maker (``MM1'') submits an Auction response to buy 20
contracts at $1.02, a second Market-Maker (``MM2'') submits an Action
response to buy 20 contracts at $1.01, and a third Market-Maker
(``MM3'') submits an Auction response to buy 20 contracts at $1.00. The
Auction then concludes. In this example, MM1 and the Initiating Member
would each be allocated 20 contracts at $1.02 and MM2 and the
Initiating Member would each be allocated 20 contracts at $1.01 since
the Initiating Member is willing to match the price and size at each
improved price level. The remaining 20 contracts would be allocated 10
to the Priority Customer order resting on the book at $1.00 because the
Priority Customer would retain priority at that price level; the
remaining 10 contracts would be allocated 50/50 to MM3 and the
Initiating Member, 5 contracts each.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The Exchange notes that if an unrelated market or
marketable limit order on the opposite side of the market as the
Agency Order was received during the Auction and ended the Auction,
such unrelated order shall trade against the Agency Order at the
midpoint of the best RFR response (or in the absence of a RFR
response, the initiating price) and the NBBO on the other side of
the market from the RFR responses (rounded towards the disseminated
quote when necessary). See Exchange Rule 515A(2)(iii)(F). For
example, assume that the NBBO is $1.00-$1.20. An Initiating Trading
Permit Holder submits a matched Agency Order to sell 100 options
contracts at in the series at $1.10. The Auction begins and during
the Auction, one competing Market-Maker submits an Auction response
to buy 100 contracts at $1.15. Assume that after the first response
is received, an unrelated public customer order to buy 100 contracts
at $1.20 is received. This would conclude the auction early after
which the public customer order would trade 100 contracts with the
Agency Order at $1.18 (i.e. the $1.175 midpoint between the best RFR
response ($1.15) and the NBBO on the other side of the market from
the RFR responses ($1.20), rounded up to the next minimum
increment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that increasing the Initiating Member's
allocation priority for auto-match submissions that only have one
competing Member's response at the final auto-match price point fairly
distributes the Agency Order when there are only two counterparties to
the Auction involved, and that doing so is reasonable because of the
value that Initiating members provide to the market. Initiating Members
selecting the auto-match option for Agency Orders guarantee an
execution at the NBBO or at a better price, and are subject to a
greater market risk than single-price submissions while the order is
exposed to other PRIME participants. As such, the Exchange believes
that the value added from Initiating Members guaranteeing execution of
Agency Orders at a price equal to or better than the NBBO in
combination with the additional market risk of initiating auto-match
submissions warrants an allocation priority of at least the same
percentage as Initiating Members who submit single-price orders into
PRIME. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change, like
other price improvement allocation programs currently offered by
competitor exchanges, will benefit investors by attracting more order
flow as well as increasing the frequency with which Members initiate
Auctions, which may result in greater opportunities for customer order
price improvement. Moreover, as discussed above, the proposed rule
change is consistent with the rules and proposals of other
exchanges.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See supra notes 6 and 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to add text to Rules 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H)
and (I) to describe the manner in which remaining contracts would be
allocated at the conclusion of an Auction under the scenarios therein.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend sub-paragraphs (H) and (I)
to provide that (subject to Priority Customer priority), after the
Initiating Member has received an allocation of up to 40% or 50% of the
Agency Order (or of the remainder of the Agency Order in the case of an
auto-match submission) depending upon the number of Member's responses
matching the Initiating Member's submission, contracts shall be
allocated among remaining quotes, orders, and auction responses (i.e.
interests other than the Initiating Member) at the final auction price
in accordance with the matching algorithm in effect for the affected
class. If all Member responses are filled (i.e. no other interests
remain), any remaining contracts will be allocated to the Initiating
Member at the single-price submission price for single-price
submissions or, for auto-match submissions, at the designated limit
price described in Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(A). The Exchange believes that
this additional language would add clarity in the Rules with respect to
how remaining odd-lots will be allocated at the conclusion of an
Auction.
For example, suppose that the NBBO for a particular option is
$1.00-$1.20. The minimum increment for the series is $0.01 and the
matching algorithm in effect for the option class is pro rata. An
Initiating Member submits a matched Agency Order to sell 5 contracts at
$1.10. The Auction begins and, during the Auction, one competing
Market-Maker (``MM1'') submits a response to buy 5 contracts at $1.10,
followed by another Market-Maker (``MM2'') submitting a response to buy
5 contracts at $1.10. The Auction concludes. In this case, under
proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), the Initiating Member
[[Page 29765]]
would receive an allocation up to 40%, or, in this case, 2 contracts at
$1.10. MM1 and MM2 would then receive 1 contract each at $1.10
according to the pro rata allocation algorithm in place for the class
with MM1, as the first responder, receiving the final 1 contract at the
final auction price of $1.10.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Exchange Rule 514(c)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, suppose that the NBBO for a particular option is $1.00-
$1.20. The minimum increment for the series is $0.01 and the matching
algorithm in effect for the option class is pro rata. An Initiating
Member submits a matched Agency Order to sell 5 contracts at $1.10. The
Auction begins and, during the Auction, one competing Market-Maker
(``MM1'') submits a response to buy 1 contract at $1.10, followed by
another Market-Maker (``MM2'') submitting a response to buy 1 contract
at $1.10. The Auction concludes. In this case, under proposed Rule
515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), the Initiating Member would receive an allocation
up to 40% or, in this case, 2 contracts at $1.10. MM1 and MM2 would
then receive 1 contract each at $1.10 according to the pro rata
allocation algorithm in place for the class. With no other competing
interest for the Auction, however, proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H)
will simply make clear that if all Member responses are filled (i.e. no
other interest remains), any remaining contracts will be allocated to
the Initiating Member at the single-price submission price. In this
case, the final 1 contract would be allocated to the Initiating Member
at $1.10.
Remaining odd-lots for auto-match submissions would be similarly
allocated under proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I), except that if all
Member responses are filled (i.e. no other interest remains), any
remaining contracts will be allocated to the Initiating Member at the
designated limit price described in sub-paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A). For
example, suppose that the NBBO for a particular option is $1.00-$1.20
and the offer is represented by a limit order on the book. The minimum
increment for the series is $0.01 and the matching algorithm in effect
for the option class is pro rata. An Initiating Member submits an auto-
matched Agency Order to buy 5 contracts at $1.19, which is one price
increment better than the booked order's limit price of $1.20.\15\
Assume that the Auction begins and, during the Auction, one competing
Market-Maker (``MM1'') submits a response to sell 1 contract at $1.18,
followed by another Market-Maker (``MM2'') submitting a response to
sell 1 contract at $1.17. The Auction concludes. In this case, MM2 and
the Initiating Member would each receive 1 contract at $1.17 and MM1
and the Initiating Member would each receive 1 contract at $1.18.
Because all Member responses would then be filled (i.e. no other
interests remain), any remaining contracts will be allocated to the
Initiating Member at the designated limit price described in sub-
paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A), in this case, 1 contract at $1.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange notes that these proposed amendments are based on, and
consistent with, the rules and proposals of other competitor
exchanges.\16\ The Exchange believes that the value added when
Initiating Members guarantee the execution of Agency Orders at a price
equal to or better than the NBBO warrants (to the extent that the
Initiating Member is on the final Auction price), an Auction allocation
priority of at least the same percentage of the order as any competing
Auction responses. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule
change, like other price improvement allocation programs currently
offered by competitor exchanges, will benefit investors by attracting
more order flow and by increasing the frequency with which Members
initiate Auctions, which may result in greater opportunities for price
improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See supra notes 6 and 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Amendments
The Exchange is also proposing two clarifying technical amendments.
Specifically, The Exchange proposes to replace the word ``order'' with
the more precise term ``Agency Order'' in the phrases that are
currently in Rules 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H) and (I) for the avoidance of
doubt.\17\ Additionally, as stated above,\18\ the Exchange is proposing
to define, in proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I), the price point where
the balance of the Agency Order can be fully executed as the ``final
auto-match price point'' in the rule text. This proposed amendment is
intended for clarity and ease of reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See supra note 9.
\18\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
MIAX believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \20\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange further
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) \21\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed
to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
protects investors and is in the public interest because it fairly
distributes the allocation of the PRIME Agency Order between the
Initiating Member and the Member who responded when they are the only
two counterparties to the Auction and/or the number of contracts
remaining at the final Auction price cannot be evenly distributed at
the end of an Auction. The proposed rule change is intended to enable
the Exchange to compete with other exchanges that currently offer price
improvement programs with the same trade allocation percentages, and
should benefit investors by attracting more order flow and by
increasing the number of orders submitted into the PRIME auction
mechanism, which the Exchange believes will result in greater
opportunity for price improvement. Moreover, the proposed rule change
is consistent with the rules and proposals of other exchanges.
Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed technical
clarifying and definitional amendments to Rule 515A will benefit market
participants by enhancing transparency and clarity to the Rules.
With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, the
Exchange notes that it has analyzed its capacity and represents that it
and the Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary
systems capacity to handle any potential additional traffic associated
with the proposed rule change. The Exchange believes that its members
will not have a capacity issue as a result of this proposal.
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
[[Page 29766]]
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The proposed changes are meant to more fairly allocate an Agency
Order submitted for price improvement using auto-match when there are
only two competing participants on the contra-side of the Agency Order.
The Exchange does not believe that this change will discourage any
market participants from entering into the auto-match option of MIAX
PRIME. Because auto-match is a more aggressive strategy than a single-
price submission, increasing the Initiating Member's auto-match
allocation to up to 50% of the remainder of the Agency Order when there
is only one competing response at the final auto-match price point
results in a fair and reasonable allocation methodology. This should
encourage more Initiating Members to select the auto-match option when
submitting Agency Orders for price improvement via MIAX PRIME, thus
enhancing competition for participation in Agency Order allocations.
Furthermore, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is a
competitive response to similar provisions in the price improvement
auction rules of BOX \22\ and CBOE \23\ and thus should promote
competition among the options exchanges and establish uniform price
improvement auction rules on the various exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See supra note 6.
\23\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all the reasons stated, the Exchange does not believe that the
proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, and
believes the proposed change will in fact enhance competition.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
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 after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
\25\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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 under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \26\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \27\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests
that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Exchange
states that waiver of the operative delay will allow the Exchange to
compete with trade allocation entitlements in price improvement
auctions that are currently in place on other exchanges.\28\ For this
reason, 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 designates the proposed rule change
to be operative upon filing.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
\28\ See supra notes 6 and 7.
\29\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the
Commission 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 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 [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2015-36 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-36. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-36 and should be
submitted on or before June 12, 2015.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12416 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P