Adjudication & 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|
|January 01, 2006||SD06014||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|January 01, 2006||SD06012||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Denials|
|January 01, 2006||SD06004||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|January 01, 2006||SD06009||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|January 01, 2006||SD06013||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|January 01, 2006||SD06001||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|January 01, 2006||SD06005||In the Matter of the Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|December 30, 2005||CAF030042||In the Matter of Department of Enforcement, Complainant vs. Respondent||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|December 30, 2005||C8A050027||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Marylan Taylor||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 29, 2005||C06040027||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Sterling Scott Lee & Dennis Todd Lloyd Gordon||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 28, 2005||C02040016||Philippe N. Keyes||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 21, 2005||C01050008||Hearing Panel Decision as to Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|December 21, 2005||CAF040084||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Christopher W. Black||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 20, 2005||FPI050008||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Jay A. Ochanpaugh||Expedited Decision, Rule 9550 Expedited Decisions|
|December 19, 2005||E1020010426-04||Order Denying Motion for More Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|December 15, 2005||CE3050003||Order Deferring Ruling on Joint Motion for Leave to Offer Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|December 15, 2005||C9B040080||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Morton Bruce Erenstein||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 15, 2005||C05050005||Order Denying Respondent's Motion Under Rule 9253||Disciplinary Order|
|December 14, 2005||C07050029||Order Denying Respondent 1's Motion to Postpone the Hearing and to Compel Discovery||Disciplinary Order|
|December 12, 2005||C07040077||Dulce Maria Salaverria||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 07, 2005||C3A050003||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Kenneth Christopher Shelley||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 07, 2005||C11040006||Justin F. Ficken||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 07, 2005||C10030088||Andrew P. Schneider||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 29, 2005||C9B050011||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Charles J. Cuozzo, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 18, 2005||CAF040058||Order Regarding Admissibility of Tape Recordings and Transcripts||Disciplinary Order|