17 C.F.R. § 201.411

Commission consideration of initial decisions by hearing officers

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Scope of review. The Commission may affirm, reverse, modify, set aside or remand for further proceedings, in whole or in part, an initial decision by a hearing officer and may make any findings or conclusions that in its judgment are proper and on the basis of the record.

(b) Standards for granting review pursuant to a petition for review—(1) Mandatory review. After a petition for review has been filed, the Commission shall review any initial decision that:

(i) Denies any request for action pursuant to Section 8(a) or Section 8(c) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. 77h(a), (c), or the first sentence of Section 12(d) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(d);

(ii) Suspends trading in a security pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(k); or

(iii) Is in a case of adjudication (as defined in 5 U.S.C. 551) not required to be determined on the record after notice and opportunity for hearing (except to the extent there is involved a matter described in 5 U.S.C. 554(a) (1) through (6)).

(2) Discretionary review. The Commission may decline to review any other decision. In determining whether to grant review, the Commission shall consider whether the petition for review makes a reasonable showing that:

(i) A prejudicial error was committed in the conduct of the proceeding; or

(ii) The decision embodies:

(A) A finding or conclusion of material fact that is clearly erroneous; or

(B) A conclusion of law that is erroneous; or

(c) Commission review other than pursuant to a petition for review. The Commission may, on its own initiative, order review of any initial decision, or any portion of any initial decision, within 21 days after the end of the period established for filing a petition for review pursuant to § 201.410(b). A party who does not intend to file a petition for review, and who desires the Commission's determination whether to order review on its own initiative to be made in a shorter time, may make a motion for an expedited decision, accompanied by a written statement that the party waives its right to file a petition for review. The vote of one member of the Commission, conveyed to the Secretary, shall be sufficient to bring a matter before the Commission for review.

(d) Limitations on matters reviewed. Review by the Commission of an initial decision shall be limited to the issues specified in an opening brief that complies with § 201.450(b), or the issues, if any, specified in the briefing schedule order issued pursuant to § 201.450(a). Any exception to an initial decision not supported in an opening brief that complies with § 201.450(b) may, at the discretion of the Commission, be deemed to have been waived by the petitioner. On notice to all parties, however, the Commission may, at any time prior to issuance of its decision, raise and determine any other matters that it deems material, with opportunity for oral or written argument thereon by the parties.

(e) Summary affirmance. (1) At any time within 21 days after the filing of a petition for review pursuant to § 201.410(b), any party may file a motion in accordance with § 201.154 asking that the Commission summarily affirm an initial decision. Any party may file an opposition and reply to such motion in accordance with § 201.154. Pending determination of the motion for summary affirmance, the Commission, in its discretion, may delay issuance of a briefing schedule order pursuant to § 201.450.

(2) Upon consideration of the motion and any opposition or upon its own initiative, the Commission may summarily affirm an initial decision. The Commission may grant summary affirmance if it finds that no issue raised in the initial decision warrants consideration by the Commission of further oral or written argument. The Commission will decline to grant summary affirmance upon a reasonable showing that a prejudicial error was committed in the conduct of the proceeding or that the decision embodies an exercise of discretion or decision of law or policy that is important and that the Commission should review.

(f) Failure to obtain a majority. In the event a majority of participating Commissioners do not agree to a disposition on the merits, the initial decision shall be of no effect, and an order will be issued in accordance with this result.

[60 FR 32796, June 23, 1995, as amended at 69 FR 13179, Mar. 19, 2004; 70 FR 72570, Dec. 5, 2005; 81 FR 50240, July 29, 2016]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2015–2025 · leading case: Bandimere v. United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 844 F.3d 1168 (10th Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bandimere v. United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 844 F.3d 1168 (10th Cir. 2016). · cites it 7× “Further, an SEC ALJ’s authority to issue an initial decision is significant because, even if reviewed de novo, the ALJ plays a significant role as detailed above in conducting proceedings and developing the record leading to the decision, and the decision publicly states whether…”

Raymond J. Lucia Companies, Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 832 F.3d 277 (D.C. Cir. 2016). · cites it 8× “§ 78d — 1(b); see also 17 C.F.R. § 201.411 (b)-(e). Other than where a petition for review triggers mandatory review, 15 U.”

Lucia v. SEC, 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018). “” 17 CFR §201.411 (a) (2017). The Commission is also in no way confined by the record ini- tially developed by an ALJ.”

Axon Enter., Inc. v. FTC, 598 U.S. 175 (2023). “54 ; 17 CFR § 201.411 (a). Or if no such review has occurred, the ALJ's ruling itself becomes the decision of the Commission.”

Hill v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 114 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (N.D. Ga. 2015). · cites it 3× “” 17 C.F.R. § 201.411 (c). A decision is not final until the SEC issues it.”

Bennett v. U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 844 F.3d 174 (4th Cir. 2016). “See 17 C.F.R. §§ 201.411 (a), 201.360(d)(2). Thus, unlike the petitioners’ claims in.”

Diane S. P. v. Berryhill, 379 F. Supp. 3d 498 (E.D. Va. 2019). · cites it 2× “; see 17 C.F.R. § 201.411 . But Lucia nowhere cited or discussed the regulation in question in identifying the challenge as timely.”

The Robare Grp., LTD. v. SEC, 922 F.3d 468 (D.C. Cir. 2019). “The Commission appropriately gave "significant weight" to the ALJ's credibility determinations in finding that the conduct of TRG and its principals was neither intentional nor reckless. Decision at 12. Because its review of the administrative record was de novo , however, the…”

Ironridge Global IV, Ltd. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 146 F. Supp. 3d 1294 (N.D. Ga. 2015). · cites it 3× “” 17 C.F.R. § 201.411 (c). A decision is not final until the SEC issues it.”

Axon Enter., Inc. v. FTC, 598 U.S. 175 (2023). “54 ; 17 CFR §201.411 (a). Or if no such review has occurred, the ALJ’s ruling itself becomes the decision of the Commission.”

Gray Fin. Grp., Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 166 F. Supp. 3d 1335 (N.D. Ga. 2015). · cites it 3× “” 17 C.F.R. § 201.411 (c). A decision is not final until the SEC issues it.”

Eric D. Bilharz & Anthony J. Pinto, Jr. v. Douglas A. Collins (Vet. App. 2025). “And Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations cited by Raddatz (which are now set forth in 17 C.F.R. § 201.411 ) provide for an initial decision by the hearing officer that includes factual findings, legal conclusions, and, where appropriate, orders relief.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.