The North American Derivatives Exchange (Nadex) has requested guidance regarding its Amended Order of Registration as a Derivatives Clearing Organization (the Nadex DCO Order) and Nadex’s Amended Order as a Designated Contract Market (the Nadex DCM Order, and, together with the Nadex DCO Order, the Nadex Orders), both dated March 30, 2010. Among other things, the Nadex Orders allow intermediation of contracts traded on Nadex’s designated contract market provided that such contracts are fully collateralized.

DCIO and DMO issued a no-action letter that provides temporary, no-action relief from certain self-effectuating provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and the CEA that otherwise would take effect on July 16, 2011, but that require further definition and may not be eligible for the exemptive relief provided by the order issued by the Commission on July 14, 2011 pursuant to section 4(c) of the CEA.

The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partners of two commodity pools from registering as CPOs under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affiliated, registered CPO (“designee”) to serve as the CPO of the pools instead, where, among other things: (1) the general partners and the designee are under common ownership and control; (2) the general partners have delegated all of their management authority to the designee; (3) the general partners do not engage in the solicitation of investors for the pool and do not man

The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided exemptive relief to a registered CPO and CTA from the books and records location requirements of Rules 4.23 and 4.33 such that the CPO/CTA may maintain its books and records at a branch office (also the main business office of an affiliated company) that provides operational support to the CPO/CTA.

The Division confirmed that under the specific facts represented to it, a firm that was required to be registered as an IB, and was so registered, would not also be required to register as a CTA in connection with providing certain services to its retail foreign exchange customers.

This letter withdraws relief previously granted in staff letters 02-22, 02-90 and 06-20. The previous letters provided “no-action” relief to registered securities broker-dealers and their registered representatives in connection with their offer and sale of certain futures contracts. The Division determined to withdraw the relief on a prospective basis based primarily on consumer protection issues including the uncertain treatment of customer funds in the event of insolvency of a broker.

The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool from registering as a CPO under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affiliated, registered CPO (“designee”) to serve as the CPO of the pool instead, where, among other things: (1) the general partner and the designee are under common ownership and control; (2) the general partner has delegated all of its management authority to the designee; (3) the general partner does not engage in the solicitation of investors for the pool and does not manage pr

The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool from registering as a CPO under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affiliated, registered CPO (“designee”) to serve as the CPO of the pool instead, where, among other things: (1) the general partner and the designee are under common ownership and control; (2) the general partner has delegated all of its management authority to the designee; (3) the general partner does not engage in the solicitation of investors for the pool and does not manage pr

The CPO of a pool that had previously been granted relief from the certification requirement for fiscal year 2009 informed DCIO that the pool had ceased operations subsequent to the issuance of relief and requested relief from the certification requirement for the pool’s final annual report. Because the facts were substantially identical to those that formed the basis for the issuance of the prior relief and the CPO submitted waivers from the pool’s two participants, DCIO granted the relief requested.

The CPOs of a pool requested an extension of time for the filing of the pool’s 2009 annual report beyond June 29, 2010, due to a delay in the receipt of financial statements from investee pools. DCIO determined that the interests of participants in receiving timely information outweighed the CPOs’ hardship and DENIED the request.