UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Complainant Samuel Weah has submitted a motion to set aside judgment that we treat as a motion to reconsider the Commission's September 13, 2000 Order of Summary Affirmance. The Commission's reparations rules do not expressly provide for motions for reconsideration. Kohler v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., [1986-1987 Transfer Binder] Comm. Fut. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 23,437 at 33,172 (CFTC Dec. 30, 1986). Such relief is only available in "truly extraordinary circumstances." Id. at 33,173.

The reasons for reconsideration that complainant set forth in his submission do not establish one of the narrow circumstances justifying reconsideration by the Commission. The record shows that complainant failed to submit sufficient reliable evidence to prove his allegations of wrongdoing. The difficult financial circumstances that he cites in his motion are not an appropriate basis for awarding him damages in the absence of such proof.

Accordingly, complainant Weah's motion for reconsideration is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.¹

Edson G. Case
Deputy General Counsel
Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Dated: October 13, 2000

1 By the Commission pursuant to delegated authority. 17 C.F.R. § 12.408(a)(6).