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|
|Oct 8, 2010||2008014621701||Order Denying Respondents' Motion to Compel Production of Documents and List of Withheld Documents||Disciplinary Order|
|Nov 8, 2011||2008014621701||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC and Stephen H. Brinck, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 28, 2011||2008014621701||Order Granting Enforcement’s Motion to Permit Certain Witnesses to Have Counsel Present||Disciplinary Order|
|Jan 25, 2012||2008014285801||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Paul James Marshall||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 18, 2012||2008014015901||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Jeremy D. Hare||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 22, 2011||20080138685||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Ron William Howell||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 4, 2013||2008013864401||Amended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Michael Jennings, Brian Mulvey and Respondent 3||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 28, 2012||2008013863702||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|Apr 30, 2010||2008013503101||Order Denying Respondent's Motions for Leave to Seek and Retain Counsel and to Adjourn and Retain Counsel||Disciplinary Order|
|Sep 14, 2009||2008013474501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Daphne Easley||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 12, 2010||2008013391701||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Trent Tremayne Hughes||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 22, 2010||2008013087201||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Bradford Orosey||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 16, 2009||2008012955301||Order Denying Motion for More Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|Sep 28, 2012||2008012925001||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. The Dratel Group, Inc. and William M. Dratel||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 28, 2011||2008012925001||Order Regarding Pending Motions and Pre-Hearing Issues||Disciplinary Order|
|May 2, 2014||2008012925001||APPEALED: The Dratel Group, Inc. and William M. Dratel||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 15, 2013||20080127674, 20080133768||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Angelo Xagoraris||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 1, 2014||20080127674 & 20080133768||Angelo Xagoraris||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 19, 2010||2008012531501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Kevin Scott Pound||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 3, 2011||2008012169101||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. AIS Financial, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 7, 2012||2008012137601||Gregory Richard Imbruce||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 25, 2010||20080121376||Order Denying Motion to Dismiss||Disciplinary Order|
|Jan 7, 2011||20080121376||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Market Regulation v. Gregory Richard Imbruce||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 5, 2009||20080120960||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Rebecca A. Reichman||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 8, 2010||2008012026601||CMG Institutional Trading, LLC and Shawn D. Baldwin||Disciplinary Decision|