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|
|Apr 8, 2015||2011025622001||Order Denying Respondent's Motion for Leave to Permit Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 2, 2015||2012034045101||Charles H. Melvin, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 2, 2015||2013036217601||Order Granting In Part and Denying In Part Enforcement’s Motion for Partial Summary Disposition||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 31, 2015||2011027666902||APPEALED: Merrimac Corporate Securities, Inc. and Robert Nash||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 30, 2015||2011025785602||Anthony Warren Thompson and TNP Securities, LLC||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 30, 2015||2011025675501||APPEALED: Kimberly Springsteen-Abbott||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 25, 2015||SD-2025||ConvergEx Execution Solutions, LLC||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Mar 19, 2015||20100215720-01||Order Denying Respondent’s Motion for Permission to Seek Additional Party Discovery||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 18, 2015||DFC140002||Order Granting Complainant's Motion to Dismiss Hearing Request||Expedited Order|
|Mar 18, 2015||DFC140002||Order Granting Complainant’s Motion to Dismiss Hearing Request||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 17, 2015||2011027271901||Richard Blair||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 16, 2015||2006006705601r||APPEALED: John M.E. Saad||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 12, 2015||FPI140011||Hearing Panel Decision in Regulatory Operations v. Alex Lubetsky||Expedited Decision, Rule 9550 Expedited Decisions|
|Mar 10, 2015||2011026788801||Keith Geary||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 9, 2015||2011025899601||David and Sian Harari||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 9, 2015||2012030724101||APPEALED: Fox Financial Management Corporation, Brian A. Murphy, and James E. Rooney, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 3, 2015||20110269351||John Cherry, III||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 27, 2015||2011028061001||APPEALED: Keilen Dimone Wiley||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 26, 2015||SD-2024||G-Trade Services LLC||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Feb 23, 2015||2010024522103||Order Denying Respondents’ Motion Pursuant to Rule 9251||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 13, 2015||2013036217601||Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Enforcement’s Motion to Compel Respondent’s Compliance with a Post-Complaint Rule 8210 Request for Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 3, 2015||SD-1865||Guy S. Amico with Newbridge Securities Corp.||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Feb 3, 2015||2011025706401||Order Granting Department of Enforcement’s Motion for Leave to Offer Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|Jan 30, 2015||SD-1865||Scott H. Goldstein with Newbridge Securities Corp.||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Jan 29, 2015||SD-2050||Theodore Rothman with First Allied Securities, Inc.||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|