Adjudication and Decisions
When FINRA determines that violations of securities rules have occurred and formal disciplinary action is necessary, the Enforcement Department or Market Regulation Department files a complaint with the Office of Hearing Officers (OHO).
The Office arranges a three-person panel to hear the case. The panel is chaired by a hearing officer who is an employee of the Office of Hearing Officers. The Chief Hearing Officer appoints two industry panelists, drawn primarily from a pool of current and former securities industry members of FINRA's District Committees, as well as its Market Regulation Committee, former members of FINRA's National Adjudicatory Council (NAC) and former FINRA Governors.
At the hearing, the parties present evidence for the panel to determine whether a firm or individual has engaged in conduct that violates FINRA rules, SEC regulations or federal securities laws. In reaching its decision, the hearing panel also considers previous court, SEC, and NAC decisions to determine if violations occurred. The NAC is the national committee which reviews initial decisions rendered in FINRA disciplinary and membership proceedings.
For each case, the hearing panel will issue a written decision explaining the reasons for its ruling and consult the FINRA Sanction Guidelines to determine the appropriate sanctions if violations have occurred. FINRA also, when feasible and appropriate, can order firms and individuals to make restitution to harmed customers.
Under FINRA's disciplinary procedures, a firm or individual has the right to appeal a hearing panel decision to the NAC, or the NAC may on its own initiate a review of a decision. On appeal, the NAC will determine if a hearing panel's findings were legally correct, factually supported and consistent with FINRA's Sanction Guidelines. While a panel decision is on appeal, the sanction is not enforced against the firm or individual.
Unless FINRA's Board of Governors decides to review the NAC's appellate decision, that decision represents FINRA's final action. A firm or individual can appeal FINRA's decision to the SEC and then to federal court.
|Date of Decision||Proceeding No.||Title||Type|
|Nov 6, 2014||SD-2017||Piper Jaffray & Co.||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Oct 20, 2016||SD-2071||PHX Financial, Inc.||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Dec 28, 2005||C02040016||Philippe N. Keyes||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 25, 2007||C02040016||Philippe N. Keyes||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 4, 2016||20120320803-01||APPEALED: Peter J. Auzers and Shiva Naby||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 17, 2006||C9B040059||Perpetual Securities, Inc., Cathy Y. Huang, and Youwei P. Xu||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 10, 2005||C07030055||PAZ Securities, Inc. and Joseph Mizrachi||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 3, 2005||C8A030062||Paul Zdzieblowski||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 11, 2004||C01020014||Paul Joseph Benz||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 1, 2001||C02000037||Paul John Hoeper||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 18, 2016||2012034719701||APPEALED: Paul E. Taboada||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 24, 2017||2012034719701||APPEALED: Paul E. Taboada||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 7, 2008||2005002570601||Paul Douglas Paratore||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 7, 2015||20090208031-02||Paul Charles Dotson||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 14, 2009||2006004377701||Paul Bryan Zenke||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 23, 2006||C01040010||Patrick Orvil Nugent||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 16, 2015||SD-2054||Patrick Lubin with Dinosaur Securities||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Mar 27, 2014||SD-1975||Patrick Dukette||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Apr 28, 2015||2012033351801||CALLED FOR REVIEW: Paolo Franca Iida||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 18, 2016||2012033351801||Paolo Franca Iida||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 22, 1998||C9A960029||Pamela A. Hartsock||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 27, 2002||C01000037||Pacific On-Line Trading & Securities, Inc., & Timothy Alan McAdams||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 23, 1998||C3B960004||Otto M. Bruun||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 13, 1999||CMS980108||Order with Respect to Respondent's Motion to Compel Production of Documents||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 9, 2000||C8A990032||Order Vacating Default Against Respondent, Granting Complainant Leave to Re-Serve the Complaint, and Setting a Briefing Schedule on the Issue of Jurisdiction||Disciplinary Order|