C.F.R. » Title 17 » CHAPTER II—SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION › PART 203—RULES RELATING TO INVESTIGATIONS › Subpart B—Formal Investigative Proceedings

17 C.F.R. § 203.6

Transcripts

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

Transcripts, if any, of formal investigative proceedings shall be recorded solely by the official reporter, or by any other person or means designated by the officer conducting the investigation. A person who has submitted documentary evidence or testimony in a formal investigative proceeding shall be entitled, upon written request, to procure a copy of his documentary evidence or a transcript of his testimony on payment of the appropriate fees: Provided, however, That in a nonpublic formal investigative proceeding the Commission may for good cause deny such request. In any event, any witness, upon proper identification, shall have the right to inspect the official transcript of the witness' own testimony.

(15 U.S.C. 78d-1) [37 FR 25166, Nov. 28, 1972]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1966–2024 · leading case: Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,167 United States of Am. v. Benjamin Lieberman, United States of Am. v. Jack H. Shapiro, 608 F.2d 889 (1st Cir. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,167 United States of Am. v. Benjamin Lieberman, United States of Am. v. Jack H. Shapiro, 608 F.2d 889 (1st Cir. 1980). “We do not read the applicable rule, 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 , to require recording of everything said during an SEC investigation, and, therefore, we cannot conclude that the SEC deprived Lieberman of due process by failing to follow its own published rules.”
Biben v. Card, 119 F.R.D. 421 (W.D. Mo. 1987). · cites it 2× “The Commission’s position was based upon Rule 6 of its Rules Relating to Investigations, 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 , which then provided: A person submitting documentary evidence or testimony in a formal investigative proceeding shall be entitled to procure a copy of his documentary…”
EF Hutton & Co. v. Brown, 305 F. Supp. 371 (S.D. Tex. 1969). “Pursuant to regulation and policy of the SEC, see 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 , a copy of the transcript of the hearing was not made available to Brown or Hutton.”
Willard J. Lamorte v. Hon. Walter R. Mansfield, Judge of the United States Dist. Court for the S. Dist. of New York, 438 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1971). · cites it 2× “§ 555 (e), and regulation, 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 , to obtain under some circumstances a transcript of his testimony before the SEC in a nonpublic investigation, he did not thereby forfeit his alleged privilege to maintain the confidentiality of this testimony.”
In re Legato Sys., Inc. Sec. Litig., 204 F.R.D. 167 (N.D. Cal. 2001). · cites it 3× “” Plaintiffs note that 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 provides that a person testifying before the SEC is “entitled” to a copy of the transcript of his or her testimony: Transcripts, if any, of formal investigative proceedings shall be recorded solely by the official reporter, or by any…”
In re Woolworth Corp. Sec. Class Action Litig., 166 F.R.D. 311 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs contend that if subpoenaed to do so, Kirsner, in turn, must produce the transcripts because she is in “control” of them, in that she — and she alone — has a legal right to obtain them pursuant to 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 which reads: A person who has submitted documentary…”
In re Dom. Air Transp. Antitrust Litig., 142 F.R.D. 354 (N.D. Ga. 1992). “See 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 . Furthermore, courts interpreting SEC policies have found that the SEC will only supply a transcript of testimony to the witness.”
Herbst v. Able, 63 F.R.D. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1972). “” It noted, however, that under the Commission’s rules, Rule 6, 17 C.F.R. 203.6, “each witness is entitled to a transcript of his own testimony.”
Com. Capital Corp., a Corp., G.N. Van Horn & Bert Chesnut v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 360 F.2d 856 (7th Cir. 1966). “Thereafter, on May 28, 1965, petitioners’ attorney requested permission, pursuant to Rule 6 of the SEC’s Rules Relating to Investigations ( 17 CFR § 203.6 ) to purchase copies of their transcripts from the official reporter.”
In re Four Seasons Sec. Laws Litig., 54 F.R.D. 527 (W.D. Okla. 1972). “*5 In that month, however, the Commission, in accordance with a recommendation that had been made by the Administrative Conference, *6 amended Rule 6 of its Rules Relating to Investigations, 17 CFR 203.6, so that it now provides: “ ‘A person .”
Zients v. LaMorte, 319 F. Supp. 956 (S.D.N.Y. 1970). · cites it 2× “” *958 And 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 , which adds: “Transcripts, if any, of formal investigative proceedings, shall be recorded * * * : Provided, however, That in a nonpublic formal investigative proceeding a person seeking a transcript of his testimony shall file a written request…”
Rasella v. Musk (S.D.N.Y. 2024). · cites it 5× “See 17 C.F.R. § 203.6 . (“A person who has submitted documentary evidence or testimony in a formal investigative proceeding shall be entitled, upon written request, to procure a copy of his documentary evidence or a transcript of his testimony.”
Show all 18 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.