[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29762-29766]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12416]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74989; File No. SR-MIAX-2015-36]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities 
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 
Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 515A

May 18, 2015.
    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities 
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice 
is hereby given that on May 13, 2015, Miami International Securities 
Exchange LLC (``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change as 
described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by 
the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit

[[Page 29763]]

comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 515A.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's 
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at 
MIAX's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements 
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and 
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The 
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in 
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in 
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such 
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 515A, MIAX Price 
Improvement Mechanism (``PRIME'') and PRIME Solicitation Mechanism, to 
provide that in instances where an Initiating Member \3\ electronically 
submits an order that it represents as agent (an ``Agency Order'') into 
a PRIME Auction (``Auction''), which the Initiating Member is willing 
to automatically match (``auto-match'') as principal, the price and 
size of responses in the Auction to a Request for Response (``RFR 
response'') \4\ up to an optional designated limit price and, at the 
price point where the balance of the Agency Order can be fully executed 
(the ``final auto-match price point'') \5\ there is only one competing 
Member's response opposite the Agency Order, the Initiating Member may 
be allocated up to fifty percent (50%) of the remainder of the Agency 
Order. The Exchange also proposes to add language in Rule 515A to more 
fully describe the manner in which any remaining contracts will be 
allocated at the conclusion of an Auction, and to make other non-
substantive changes to Rule 515A to update terminology in the Rule. 
This is a competitive filing that is substantially and materially based 
on the price improvement auction rules of BOX Options Exchange, LLC 
(``BOX),\6\ and the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (``CBOE'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization 
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading 
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Act. See Exchange 
Rule 100.
    \4\ See Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(i). When the Exchange receives 
a properly designated Agency Order for auction processing, a Request 
for Responses (``RFR'') detailing the option, side, size, and 
initiating price will be sent to all subscribers of the Exchange's 
data feeds. The RFR will last for 500 milliseconds. Members may 
submit responses to the RFR (specifying prices and sizes). RFR 
responses shall be an Auction or Cancel (``AOC'') order or an AOC 
eQuote. Such responses cannot cross the disseminated MIAX Best Bid 
or Offer (``MBBO'') on the opposite side of the market from the 
response.
    \5\ For clarity and ease of reference, the Exchange is proposing 
to define such price point as the ``final auto-match price point'' 
in the rule text.
    \6\ See BOX Rule 7150(h).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74864 (May 4, 2015), 
80 FR 26601 (May 8, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-043).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Exchange Rules 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H) and (I), upon 
conclusion of an Auction, an Initiating Member will retain certain 
priority and trade allocation privileges for an Agency Order that the 
Initiating Member seeks to cross at a single price (a ``single-price 
submission'') and for an Agency Order that the Initiating Member is 
willing to auto-match. Under current Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), if the 
best price equals the Initiating Member's single-price submission, the 
Initiating Member's single-price submission shall be allocated the 
greater of one contract or a certain percentage of the order, which 
percentage will be determined by the Exchange and may not be larger 
than 40%. However, if only one Member's response matches the Initiating 
Member's single price submission then the Initiating Member may be 
allocated up to 50% of the order.
    Similarly, current Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) provides that 
if the Initiating Member selected the auto-match option of the Auction, 
the Initiating Member shall be allocated its full size of RFR responses 
\8\ at each price point until the final auto-match price point is 
reached. At the final auto-match price point, the Initiating Member 
shall be allocated the greater of one contract or a certain percentage 
of the remainder of the Agency Order,\9\ which percentage will be 
determined by the Exchange and may not be larger than 40%. Notably, 
unlike the single-price submission rules in Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), 
current Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) provides that an Initiating Member 
would only be entitled to receive an allocation of up to 40% for orders 
that are matched at the final auto-match price point regardless of the 
number of Member responses that match the Initiating Member's auto-
match submission at the final auto-match price point, even when matched 
by only one competing Member's response. The Exchange believes this 
result to be inconsistent within the Rules and believes that Initiating 
Members that price orders more aggressively using the auto-match option 
should receive allocations at least equal to those that select a 
single-price submission option for an Auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ When the Exchange receives a properly designated Agency 
Order for auction processing, a Request for Responses (``RFR'') 
detailing the option, side, size, and initiating price will be sent 
to all subscribers of the Exchange's data feeds. The RFR will last 
for 500 milliseconds. Members may submit responses to the RFR 
(specifying prices and sizes). See Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(i).
    \9\ For further clarity and ease of reference, the Exchange is 
proposing to amend the rule to refer to the ``Agency Order'' in the 
rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) to provide 
that if only one competing Member's response is present at the final 
auto-match price point then the Initiating Member may be allocated up 
to 50% of the remainder of the Agency Order at the final auto-match 
price point. As discussed above, current Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) 
provides that an Initiating Member will receive an allocation of up to 
40% for orders that are matched at the final auto-match price point 
even when matched by only one competing Member's response. The Exchange 
believes this result to be inconsistent within the Exchange's Rules and 
believes that Initiating Members that price orders more aggressively 
using the auto-match option should receive allocations at least equal 
to those that select a single-price submission option. The Exchange 
also believes the proposed rule change will more closely align the 
language in Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I) with the language in Rule 
515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), and will thus provide additional internal 
consistency within the Exchange's Rules by harmonizing order 
allocations of single-price submissions and auto-match submissions in 
instances where there is only one competing Member's response at the 
final Auction price level. Furthermore, the proposed rule change will 
bring the Exchange's PRIME rules in line with the Rules of other 
competitor exchanges with which the Exchange competes for order flow.
    The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change would not affect 
the priority

[[Page 29764]]

of Priority Customers \10\ under Rule 515A(2)(iii)(B). Priority 
Customers on the book would continue to have priority even in cases 
where a Priority Customer order is resting on the book at the final 
Auction price. For example, suppose that the National Best Bid 
(``NBB'') for a particular option is $1.00 and the national best offer 
for the option is $1.20, and that NBB is a Priority Customer order to 
buy 10 contracts on MIAX. The minimum trading increment in the option 
is $0.01. An Initiating Member submits an auto-match Agency Order to 
sell 100 contracts in the series. The Auction begins, and one 
responding Member submits a response to buy 50 contracts at $1.00. The 
Auction then concludes. In this case, the Priority Customer on the book 
would have priority and would be allocated 10 contracts, with the 
remaining 90 contracts being allocated 40% to the Initiating Member and 
60% to the responding Member.\11\ Thus, in this example, the Initiating 
Member is entitled to receive 40%, or 36 of the remaining 90 contracts, 
and the responding Member is entitled to receive up to 60%, or 54 of 
the remaining 90 contracts, but is limited to its full size of 50 
contracts. Then the Initiating Member would be allocated the remaining 
4 contracts (for a total of 40 to the Initiating Member), because the 
Initiating Member has guaranteed the entire size of the Agency Order 
and there are no other matching participants respecting the remaining 4 
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity 
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not 
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average 
during a calendar month for its own beneficial accounts(s). See 
Exchange Rule 100.
    \11\ Although the Priority Customer order has been filled in its 
entirety, the System currently allocates the remaining 90 contracts 
as though there are still two participants (the already-filled 
Priority Customer, together with the responding Member) matching the 
Initiating Member at the final Auction price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, a Priority Customer order resting on the book at a final 
Auction price level that is worse than the best Member response will 
also retain priority in the book. For example, assume again that the 
NBB for a particular option is $1.00 and the NBO for the option is 
$1.20 and that the NBB is a Priority Customer order to buy 10 contracts 
at MIAX. The minimum increment in the option series is $0.01. An 
Initiating Member submits an auto-match Agency Order to sell 100 
contracts in the series. The Auction begins and during the Auction, one 
responding Market Maker (``MM1'') submits an Auction response to buy 20 
contracts at $1.02, a second Market-Maker (``MM2'') submits an Action 
response to buy 20 contracts at $1.01, and a third Market-Maker 
(``MM3'') submits an Auction response to buy 20 contracts at $1.00. The 
Auction then concludes. In this example, MM1 and the Initiating Member 
would each be allocated 20 contracts at $1.02 and MM2 and the 
Initiating Member would each be allocated 20 contracts at $1.01 since 
the Initiating Member is willing to match the price and size at each 
improved price level. The remaining 20 contracts would be allocated 10 
to the Priority Customer order resting on the book at $1.00 because the 
Priority Customer would retain priority at that price level; the 
remaining 10 contracts would be allocated 50/50 to MM3 and the 
Initiating Member, 5 contracts each.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange notes that if an unrelated market or 
marketable limit order on the opposite side of the market as the 
Agency Order was received during the Auction and ended the Auction, 
such unrelated order shall trade against the Agency Order at the 
midpoint of the best RFR response (or in the absence of a RFR 
response, the initiating price) and the NBBO on the other side of 
the market from the RFR responses (rounded towards the disseminated 
quote when necessary). See Exchange Rule 515A(2)(iii)(F). For 
example, assume that the NBBO is $1.00-$1.20. An Initiating Trading 
Permit Holder submits a matched Agency Order to sell 100 options 
contracts at in the series at $1.10. The Auction begins and during 
the Auction, one competing Market-Maker submits an Auction response 
to buy 100 contracts at $1.15. Assume that after the first response 
is received, an unrelated public customer order to buy 100 contracts 
at $1.20 is received. This would conclude the auction early after 
which the public customer order would trade 100 contracts with the 
Agency Order at $1.18 (i.e. the $1.175 midpoint between the best RFR 
response ($1.15) and the NBBO on the other side of the market from 
the RFR responses ($1.20), rounded up to the next minimum 
increment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that increasing the Initiating Member's 
allocation priority for auto-match submissions that only have one 
competing Member's response at the final auto-match price point fairly 
distributes the Agency Order when there are only two counterparties to 
the Auction involved, and that doing so is reasonable because of the 
value that Initiating members provide to the market. Initiating Members 
selecting the auto-match option for Agency Orders guarantee an 
execution at the NBBO or at a better price, and are subject to a 
greater market risk than single-price submissions while the order is 
exposed to other PRIME participants. As such, the Exchange believes 
that the value added from Initiating Members guaranteeing execution of 
Agency Orders at a price equal to or better than the NBBO in 
combination with the additional market risk of initiating auto-match 
submissions warrants an allocation priority of at least the same 
percentage as Initiating Members who submit single-price orders into 
PRIME. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change, like 
other price improvement allocation programs currently offered by 
competitor exchanges, will benefit investors by attracting more order 
flow as well as increasing the frequency with which Members initiate 
Auctions, which may result in greater opportunities for customer order 
price improvement. Moreover, as discussed above, the proposed rule 
change is consistent with the rules and proposals of other 
exchanges.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra notes 6 and 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to add text to Rules 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H) 
and (I) to describe the manner in which remaining contracts would be 
allocated at the conclusion of an Auction under the scenarios therein. 
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend sub-paragraphs (H) and (I) 
to provide that (subject to Priority Customer priority), after the 
Initiating Member has received an allocation of up to 40% or 50% of the 
Agency Order (or of the remainder of the Agency Order in the case of an 
auto-match submission) depending upon the number of Member's responses 
matching the Initiating Member's submission, contracts shall be 
allocated among remaining quotes, orders, and auction responses (i.e. 
interests other than the Initiating Member) at the final auction price 
in accordance with the matching algorithm in effect for the affected 
class. If all Member responses are filled (i.e. no other interests 
remain), any remaining contracts will be allocated to the Initiating 
Member at the single-price submission price for single-price 
submissions or, for auto-match submissions, at the designated limit 
price described in Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(A). The Exchange believes that 
this additional language would add clarity in the Rules with respect to 
how remaining odd-lots will be allocated at the conclusion of an 
Auction.
    For example, suppose that the NBBO for a particular option is 
$1.00-$1.20. The minimum increment for the series is $0.01 and the 
matching algorithm in effect for the option class is pro rata. An 
Initiating Member submits a matched Agency Order to sell 5 contracts at 
$1.10. The Auction begins and, during the Auction, one competing 
Market-Maker (``MM1'') submits a response to buy 5 contracts at $1.10, 
followed by another Market-Maker (``MM2'') submitting a response to buy 
5 contracts at $1.10. The Auction concludes. In this case, under 
proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), the Initiating Member

[[Page 29765]]

would receive an allocation up to 40%, or, in this case, 2 contracts at 
$1.10. MM1 and MM2 would then receive 1 contract each at $1.10 
according to the pro rata allocation algorithm in place for the class 
with MM1, as the first responder, receiving the final 1 contract at the 
final auction price of $1.10.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Exchange Rule 514(c)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, suppose that the NBBO for a particular option is $1.00-
$1.20. The minimum increment for the series is $0.01 and the matching 
algorithm in effect for the option class is pro rata. An Initiating 
Member submits a matched Agency Order to sell 5 contracts at $1.10. The 
Auction begins and, during the Auction, one competing Market-Maker 
(``MM1'') submits a response to buy 1 contract at $1.10, followed by 
another Market-Maker (``MM2'') submitting a response to buy 1 contract 
at $1.10. The Auction concludes. In this case, under proposed Rule 
515A(a)(2)(iii)(H), the Initiating Member would receive an allocation 
up to 40% or, in this case, 2 contracts at $1.10. MM1 and MM2 would 
then receive 1 contract each at $1.10 according to the pro rata 
allocation algorithm in place for the class. With no other competing 
interest for the Auction, however, proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H) 
will simply make clear that if all Member responses are filled (i.e. no 
other interest remains), any remaining contracts will be allocated to 
the Initiating Member at the single-price submission price. In this 
case, the final 1 contract would be allocated to the Initiating Member 
at $1.10.
    Remaining odd-lots for auto-match submissions would be similarly 
allocated under proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I), except that if all 
Member responses are filled (i.e. no other interest remains), any 
remaining contracts will be allocated to the Initiating Member at the 
designated limit price described in sub-paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A). For 
example, suppose that the NBBO for a particular option is $1.00-$1.20 
and the offer is represented by a limit order on the book. The minimum 
increment for the series is $0.01 and the matching algorithm in effect 
for the option class is pro rata. An Initiating Member submits an auto-
matched Agency Order to buy 5 contracts at $1.19, which is one price 
increment better than the booked order's limit price of $1.20.\15\ 
Assume that the Auction begins and, during the Auction, one competing 
Market-Maker (``MM1'') submits a response to sell 1 contract at $1.18, 
followed by another Market-Maker (``MM2'') submitting a response to 
sell 1 contract at $1.17. The Auction concludes. In this case, MM2 and 
the Initiating Member would each receive 1 contract at $1.17 and MM1 
and the Initiating Member would each receive 1 contract at $1.18. 
Because all Member responses would then be filled (i.e. no other 
interests remain), any remaining contracts will be allocated to the 
Initiating Member at the designated limit price described in sub-
paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A), in this case, 1 contract at $1.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Exchange Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that these proposed amendments are based on, and 
consistent with, the rules and proposals of other competitor 
exchanges.\16\ The Exchange believes that the value added when 
Initiating Members guarantee the execution of Agency Orders at a price 
equal to or better than the NBBO warrants (to the extent that the 
Initiating Member is on the final Auction price), an Auction allocation 
priority of at least the same percentage of the order as any competing 
Auction responses. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule 
change, like other price improvement allocation programs currently 
offered by competitor exchanges, will benefit investors by attracting 
more order flow and by increasing the frequency with which Members 
initiate Auctions, which may result in greater opportunities for price 
improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra notes 6 and 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical Amendments
    The Exchange is also proposing two clarifying technical amendments. 
Specifically, The Exchange proposes to replace the word ``order'' with 
the more precise term ``Agency Order'' in the phrases that are 
currently in Rules 515A(a)(2)(iii)(H) and (I) for the avoidance of 
doubt.\17\ Additionally, as stated above,\18\ the Exchange is proposing 
to define, in proposed Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(I), the price point where 
the balance of the Agency Order can be fully executed as the ``final 
auto-match price point'' in the rule text. This proposed amendment is 
intended for clarity and ease of reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 9.
    \18\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with 
Section 6(b) of the Act \19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of 
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \20\ in particular, in that it is designed 
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote 
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and 
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in 
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a 
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to 
protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange further 
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 
6(b)(5) \21\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed 
to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or 
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change 
protects investors and is in the public interest because it fairly 
distributes the allocation of the PRIME Agency Order between the 
Initiating Member and the Member who responded when they are the only 
two counterparties to the Auction and/or the number of contracts 
remaining at the final Auction price cannot be evenly distributed at 
the end of an Auction. The proposed rule change is intended to enable 
the Exchange to compete with other exchanges that currently offer price 
improvement programs with the same trade allocation percentages, and 
should benefit investors by attracting more order flow and by 
increasing the number of orders submitted into the PRIME auction 
mechanism, which the Exchange believes will result in greater 
opportunity for price improvement. Moreover, the proposed rule change 
is consistent with the rules and proposals of other exchanges.
    Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed technical 
clarifying and definitional amendments to Rule 515A will benefit market 
participants by enhancing transparency and clarity to the Rules.
    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, the 
Exchange notes that it has analyzed its capacity and represents that it 
and the Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary 
systems capacity to handle any potential additional traffic associated 
with the proposed rule change. The Exchange believes that its members 
will not have a capacity issue as a result of this proposal.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
impose any burden on competition that is not

[[Page 29766]]

necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The proposed changes are meant to more fairly allocate an Agency 
Order submitted for price improvement using auto-match when there are 
only two competing participants on the contra-side of the Agency Order. 
The Exchange does not believe that this change will discourage any 
market participants from entering into the auto-match option of MIAX 
PRIME. Because auto-match is a more aggressive strategy than a single-
price submission, increasing the Initiating Member's auto-match 
allocation to up to 50% of the remainder of the Agency Order when there 
is only one competing response at the final auto-match price point 
results in a fair and reasonable allocation methodology. This should 
encourage more Initiating Members to select the auto-match option when 
submitting Agency Orders for price improvement via MIAX PRIME, thus 
enhancing competition for participation in Agency Order allocations.
    Furthermore, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is a 
competitive response to similar provisions in the price improvement 
auction rules of BOX \22\ and CBOE \23\ and thus should promote 
competition among the options exchanges and establish uniform price 
improvement auction rules on the various exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra note 6.
    \23\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For all the reasons stated, the Exchange does not believe that the 
proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not 
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, and 
believes the proposed change will in fact enhance competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed 
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) 
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public 
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) 
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such 
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective 
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 
\25\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission 
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at 
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed 
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. 
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \26\ normally 
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. 
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \27\ the Commission may 
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the 
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests 
that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Exchange 
states that waiver of the operative delay will allow the Exchange to 
compete with trade allocation entitlements in price improvement 
auctions that are currently in place on other exchanges.\28\ For this 
reason, the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative 
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public 
interest. Therefore, the Commission designates the proposed rule change 
to be operative upon filing.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \28\ See supra notes 6 and 7.
    \29\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the 
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, 
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule 
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule 
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or 
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or 
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission 
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to 
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule 
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of 
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include 
File Number SR-MIAX-2015-36 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-36. This file 
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help 
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, 
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on 
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all 
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are 
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to 
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other 
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the 
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and 
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All 
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does 
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should 
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All 
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-36 and should be 
submitted on or before June 12, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12416 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P