UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

In the Matter of
CFTC Docket No. 99-11
GLOBAL MINERALS & METALS CORP.,
R. DAVID CAMPBELL, and
CARL ALM
ORDER PURSUANT TO
DELEGATED AUTHORITY

The Division of Enforcement ("Division") seeks a stay of the presiding Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") order requiring it to turn over certain investigatory documents to respondents on or before August 22, 2000.1 The Division indicates that it intends to file an application for interlocutory review despite the ALJ's refusal to certify his ruling as appropriate for immediate review.2 In this regard, the Division argues that the ALJ's ruling misconstrues a memorandum of understanding ("MOU") that the Commission and the Securities Exchange Commission ("SEC") reached with U.K. authorities in September 1991. The Division emphasizes that the ALJ's interpretation is inconsistent with both the U.K. authorities' and the SEC's understanding of the MOU's relevant provisions and that there is a substantial risk that production in accordance with the ALJ's interpretation will have a "chilling effect" on further mutual cooperation with U.K. authorities.

Without acquiescing to the Division's claims that it is entitled to a stay, respondents indicate that they do not object to the requested relief. They seek an extension of their deadline for responding to the Division's application for review until three weeks after the Division serves its application.

The Division's motion raises significant issues that merit a swift but careful review by the Commission. The brief period available before the ALJ's production deadline is incompatible with this goal. In order to maintain the status quo pending Commission consideration of the relevant issues, the Division's obligation to produce the specified documents is stayed until September 5, 2000. Respondents' deadline for filing and serving its opposition to the Division's application is extended to September 15, 2000.

IT IS SO ORDERED.3

Edson G. Case
Deputy General Counsel
Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Dated: August 22, 2000


1 The Division states that the documents in question are consultative materials involving activities in the copper market obtained from financial regulators in the United Kingdom ("U.K. authorities"). The Complaint in this proceeding involves unusual activity in the world copper market between 1989 and 1995. It alleges that respondents attempted to and did manipulate the price of copper and copper futures contracts between October and December 1995.

2 The ALJ denied certification under Commission Rule 10.101(a)(5) because, in his view: (1) his ruling rests on a legal interpretation about which reasonable minds cannot differ; (2) immediate appeal will cause delay rather than materially advancing the ultimate resolution of the proceeding; and (3) the Division would not be prejudiced if the issue were not resolved until after an initial decision were issued because the ALJ's protective order protects its legitimate interest in confidentiality.

3 For the Commission pursuant to delegated authority. 17 C.F.R. 10.109(a)(1), (7).