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|
|Mar 30, 2015||2011025675501||APPEALED: Kimberly Springsteen-Abbott||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 20, 2017||2011025675501r||APPEALED: Kimberly Springsteen-Abbott||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 1, 2014||2011025676501||Order Granting, In Part, Motion for More Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|Oct 2, 2015||2011025679201||MSC – BD, LLC and Paul J. McIntyre||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 3, 2015||2011025706401||Order Granting Department of Enforcement’s Motion for Leave to Offer Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|Jun 12, 2013||2011025780101||Order Denying Respondent’s Motion to Compel the Department of Enforcement to Produce Withheld Documents||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 30, 2015||2011025785602||Anthony Warren Thompson and TNP Securities, LLC||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 3, 2016||2011025851501||APPEALED: KCD Financial, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jun 16, 2015||2011025851501||APPEALED: KCD Financial, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 28, 2014||2011025899601||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. David Harari and Sian Harari||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 9, 2015||2011025899601||David and Sian Harari||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 10, 2014||2011025957702||Gary Giblen||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 19, 2013||2011025957702||Amended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Gary Mark Giblen||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 13, 2017||2011026346206||Jaoshiang Luo||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 10, 2014||2011026386001||Order Appointing Replacement Hearing Officer, Amending Caption, and Setting Hearing Dates||Disciplinary Order|
|Jun 29, 2015||20110263957-01||Jack Lawrence Howard||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 28, 2014||2011026664301||Amended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Gardnyr Michael Capital Inc. and Pfilip Gardnyr Hunt, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 23, 2012||2011026664301||Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part the Department of Enforcement’s Motion to Strike the Answer and Order the Filing of a New Answer||Disciplinary Order|
|Jun 17, 2014||2011026788801||Order Denying Summary Disposition||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 10, 2015||2011026788801||Keith Geary||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 10, 2013||2011026874301||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. William L. Tatro||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 13, 2013||2011026874301||Memorandum Order Directing Respondent to Comply with Rule 8210 Request for Information Regarding Respondent’s Reliance on Counsel Defense||Disciplinary Order|
|Dec 17, 2013||20110269351||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Market Regulation v. John Cherry III||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 3, 2015||20110269351||John Cherry, III||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 21, 2017||2011027007901||Shashishekhar Doni||Disciplinary Decision|