7 U.S.C. § 6b

Contracts designed to defraud or mislead

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Unlawful actionsIt shall be unlawful—(1) for any person, in or in connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract of sale of any commodity in interstate commerce or for future delivery that is made, or to be made, on or subject to the rules of a designated contract market, for or on behalf of any other person; or(2) for any person, in or in connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract of sale of any commodity for future delivery, or swap, that is made, or to be made, for or on behalf of, or with, any other person, other than on or subject to the rules of a designated contract market—(A) to cheat or defraud or attempt to cheat or defraud the other person;(B) willfully to make or cause to be made to the other person any false report or statement or willfully to enter or cause to be entered for the other person any false record;(C) willfully to deceive or attempt to deceive the other person by any means whatsoever in regard to any order or contract or the disposition or execution of any order or contract, or in regard to any act of agency performed, with respect to any order or contract for or, in the case of paragraph (2), with the other person; or(D)(i) to bucket an order if the order is either represented by the person as an order to be executed, or is required to be executed, on or subject to the rules of a designated contract market; or(ii) to fill an order by offset against the order or orders of any other person, or willfully and knowingly and without the prior consent of the other person to become the buyer in respect to any selling order of the other person, or become the seller in respect to any buying order of the other person, if the order is either represented by the person as an order to be executed, or is required to be executed, on or subject to the rules of a designated contract market unless the order is executed in accordance with the rules of the designated contract market.(b) Clarification

Subsection (a)(2) of this section shall not obligate any person, in or in connection with a transaction in a contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery, or swap, with another person, to disclose to the other person nonpublic information that may be material to the market price, rate, or level of the commodity or transaction, except as necessary to make any statement made to the other person in or in connection with the transaction not misleading in any material respect.

Nothing in this section or in any other section of this chapter shall be construed to prevent a futures commission merchant or floor broker who shall have in hand, simultaneously, buying and selling orders at the market for different principals for a like quantity of a commodity for future delivery in the same month executing such buying and selling orders at the market price: Provided, That any such execution shall take place on the floor of the exchange where such orders are to be executed at public outcry across the ring and shall be duly reported, recorded, and cleared in the same manner as other orders executed on such exchange: And provided further, That such transactions shall be made in accordance with such rules and regulations as the Commission may promulgate regarding the manner of the execution of such transactions.

(d) Inapplicability to transactions on foreign exchanges

Nothing in this section shall apply to any activity that occurs on a board of trade, exchange, or market, or clearinghouse for such board of trade, exchange, or market, located outside the United States, or territories or possessions of the United States, involving any contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery that is made, or to be made, on or subject to the rules of such board of trade, exchange, or market.

(e) Contracts of sale on group or index of securitiesIt shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails, or of any facility of any registered entity, in or in connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract of sale of any commodity for future delivery (or option on such a contract), or any swap, on a group or index of securities (or any interest therein or based on the value thereof)—(1) to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud;(2) to make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; or(3) to engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person.(Sept. 21, 1922, ch. 369, § 4b, as added June 15, 1936, ch. 545, § 5, 49 Stat. 1493; amended Pub. L. 90–258, § 5, Feb. 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 27; Pub. L. 93–463, title IV, § 405, Oct. 23, 1974, 88 Stat. 1413; Pub. L. 99–641, title I, § 101, Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3557; Pub. L. 102–546, title IV, § 402(3), Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3624; Pub. L. 106–554, § 1(a)(5) [title I, § 123(a)(5)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–407; Pub. L. 110–234, title XIII, § 13102, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1432; Pub. L. 110–246, § 4(a), title XIII, § 13102, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2194; Pub. L. 111–203, title VII, § 741(b)(1), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1730.)Editorial NotesCodification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 made identical amendments to this section. The amendments by Pub. L. 110–234 were repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

Amendments

2010—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 111–203, § 741(b)(1)(A), substituted “or swap,” for “or other agreement, contract, or transaction subject to paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 7a(g) of this title,”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 111–203, § 741(b)(1)(B), substituted “or swap,” for “or other agreement, contract or transaction subject to paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 7a(g) of this title,”.

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 111–203, § 741(b)(1)(C), added subsec. (e).

2008—Pub. L. 110–246, § 13102, inserted section catchline, added subsecs. (a) and (b), redesignated former subsecs. (b) and (c) as (c) and (d), respectively, and struck out former subsec. (a) which related to contracts designed to defraud or mislead and bucketing orders.

2000—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 106–554 substituted “registered entity” for “contract market” in two places.

1992—Pub. L. 102–546 designated first par. as subsec. (a), redesignated cls. (a) to (c) as subpars. (A) to (C), respectively, and subpars. (A) to (D) as cls. (i) to (iv), respectively, and designated second and third undesignated pars. as subsecs. (b) and (c), respectively.

1986—Pub. L. 99–641 struck out “on or subject to the rules of any contract market,” after “to be made” in cl. (2) of first par. and added concluding paragraph that this section not apply to activity on board of trade, exchange, market, or clearinghouse located outside United States involving contract of sale of commodity for future delivery.

1974—Pub. L. 93–463 substituted “a commodity” for “cotton” in provisions following subpar. (D) and inserted requirement that execution of buying and selling orders for commodities held simultaneously by the same merchant or broker be carried out in accordance with such rules and regulations as the Commission may promulgate regarding the manner of the execution of such transactions.

1968—Pub. L. 90–258 relocated cl. (1) designation in first par. to follow “unlawful” rather than to precede “any contract of sale”, provided in such cl. (1) for orders to make or making of contracts of sale “made, or to be made on or subject to the rules of any contract market, for or on behalf of any other person” and in cl. (2) “for any person, in or in connection with any order to make, or the making of,” any contract of sale of any commodity for future delivery for or on behalf of any “other” person; and inserted “other” before “person” in subpar. (A) and in subpars. (B) and (C) where appearing for first time, respectively.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the later of 360 days after July 21, 2010, or, to the extent a provision of subtitle A (§§ 711–754) of title VII of Pub. L. 111–203 requires a rulemaking, not less than 60 days after publication of the final rule or regulation implementing such provision of subtitle A, see section 754 of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 1a of this title.

Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Amendment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.

Effective Date of 1974 Amendment

For effective date of amendment by Pub. L. 93–463, see section 418 of Pub. L. 93–463, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.

Effective Date of 1968 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 90–258 effective 120 days after Feb. 19, 1968, see section 28 of Pub. L. 90–258, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.

Effective Date

For effective date of section, see section 13 of act June 15, 1936, set out as an Effective Date of 1936 Amendment note under section 1 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 372 cases (36 in the last 5 years), 1937–2026 · leading case: Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353 (1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353 (1982). · cites it 10× “The antifraud provision, § 4b, 7 U. S. C. § 6b, by its terms makes it unlawful for any person to deceive or defraud any other person in connection with any futures contract.”

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. S. Trust Metals, Inc., 894 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2018). · cites it 5× “It misrepresented to customers the fundamental nature of their investments, telling them that they were investing in metals when in fact they were investing in metals derivatives, and charging a fictitious storage fee despite the customers having no metals to store.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. JBW Capital, LLC, 812 F.3d 98 (1st Cir. 2016). · cites it 7× “We refer to the current version of 7 U.S.C. § 6b. 15 . Later in his brief, Wilson appears to abandon-this position and contend — without identifying any redOrd evidence to support his assertion — that'"the CFTC has failed to submit any material, undisputed evidence of a…”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Int'l Fin. Servs. (New York), Inc., 323 F. Supp. 2d 482 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). · cites it 3× “Fraud Title 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a) makes it unlawful for any person, in or connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract of sale of any commodity for future delivery, made, or to be made, for or on behalf of any other person .”

North Cent. F.S., Inc. v. Brown, 951 F. Supp. 1383 (N.D. Iowa 1996). · cites it 11× “Count II of the counterclaim alleges fraud in violation of section 4b of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 6b. It seeks as relief the same declarations sought in Count I of the counterclaim, as well as rescission of any purported obligation under the HTAs and such other relief as the court…”

Hagstrom v. Breutman, 572 F. Supp. 692 (N.D. Ill. 1983). · cites it 8× “This is an action brought under section 4b of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”), 7 U.S.C. § 6b and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , alleging fraud.”

Fan Wang v. Attorney Gen. United States, 898 F.3d 341 (3rd Cir. 2018). · cites it 4× “Thus, because the common law concepts of fraud and deceit required materiality, the materiality requirement was carried forward when concepts were codified in 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a), prohibiting contracts designed to defraud or mislead.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Equity Fin. Grp. LLC, 572 F.3d 150 (3rd Cir. 2009). · cites it 7× “Defendants were charged with fraud under 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b and 6o and failing to register with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, as required by 7 U.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Rosenberg, 85 F. Supp. 2d 424 (D.N.J. 2000). · cites it 7× “Rosenberg Committed Futures and Options Fraud in Violation of 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a),6c(b) and 17 U.S.C. § 33.”

Berman v. Bache, Halsey, Stuart, Shields, Inc., 467 F. Supp. 311 (S.D. Ohio 1979). · cites it 6× “Specifically, Section 4b of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6b makes it unlawful “to cheat or defraud or attempt to cheat or defraud” any person such as the plaintiff in connection with the sale of commodities futures contracts.”

First Commodity Corp. Of Boston & Richard Badoian v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, & John Ruddy, 676 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1982). · cites it 4× “The CFTC takes the polar opposite position, claiming authority to promulgate an antifraud rule without any scienter requirement.”

United States v. James Brooks, 681 F.3d 678 (5th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “Similarly, 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2) renders it unlawful for “any person, in or in connection with any order to make .”

Show all 372 citing cases →

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(1)(A) — 1 case

United States v. Dempsey, 768 F. Supp. 1256 (N.D. Ill. 1990).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(1)(B) — 2 cases

John H. Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 145 F.3d 910 (7th Cir. 1998).

United States v. Dempsey, 768 F. Supp. 1256 (N.D. Ill. 1990).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(1)(D) — 2 cases

United States v. Dempsey, 768 F. Supp. 1256 (N.D. Ill. 1990).

John H. Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 145 F.3d 910 (7th Cir. 1998).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(2) — 1 case

Nat'l City Trading Corp. v. United States, 635 F.2d 1020 (2d Cir. 1980).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(2)(A) — 1 case

Nat'l City Trading Corp. v. United States, 487 F. Supp. 1332 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(A) — 27 cases

Rebecca J. Schofield v. First Commodity Corp. of Boston, Rebecca J. Schofield v. First Commodity Corp. of Boston, 793 F.2d 28 (1st Cir. 1986).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Am. Metals Exch. Corp., 775 F. Supp. 767 (D.N.J. 1991).

Zickie Z. Maloley v. R.J. O'Brien & Assocs., Inc. Robert Gottsch Clifford Spencer Roberts & Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 819 F.2d 1435 (8th Cir. 1987).

United States v. Donald D. Dial & Horace G. Salmon, 757 F.2d 163 (7th Cir. 1985).

Commodities Futures Trading Comm'n v. Commodities Fluctuations Sys., Inc., 583 F. Supp. 1382 (S.D.N.Y. 1984).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(B) — 4 cases

John A. Vercillo v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 147 F.3d 548 (7th Cir. 1998).

United States v. Ashman, 979 F.2d 469 (7th Cir. 1992).

Merrill Lynch Futures Inc. v. Kelly, 585 F. Supp. 1245 (S.D.N.Y. 1984).

The United States of Am. v. Charles B. Grady, 225 F.2d 410 (7th Cir. 1955).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(B)(C) — 1 case

Blunt, Ellis & Loewi, Inc. v. Igram, 319 N.W.2d 189 (Iowa 1982).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(D) — 1 case

United States v. Ashman, 979 F.2d 469 (7th Cir. 1992).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a) — 46 cases

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. S. Trust Metals, Inc., 894 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2018). “It misrepresented to customers the fundamental nature of their investments, telling them that they were investing in metals when in fact they were investing in metals derivatives, and charging a fictitious storage fee despite the customers having no metals to store.”

Fan Wang v. Attorney Gen. United States, 898 F.3d 341 (3rd Cir. 2018). “Thus, because the common law concepts of fraud and deceit required materiality, the materiality requirement was carried forward when concepts were codified in 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a), prohibiting contracts designed to defraud or mislead.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Rosenberg, 85 F. Supp. 2d 424 (D.N.J. 2000). “Rosenberg Committed Futures and Options Fraud in Violation of 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a),6c(b) and 17 U.S.C. § 33.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Int'l Fin. Servs. (New York), Inc., 323 F. Supp. 2d 482 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). “Fraud Title 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a) makes it unlawful for any person, in or connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract of sale of any commodity for future delivery, made, or to be made, for or on behalf of any other person .”

Mut. Assignment & Indemnification Co. v. Lind-Waldock & Co., LLC, 364 F.3d 858 (7th Cir. 2004).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(1) — 4 cases

Cftc v. James Crombie, 914 F.3d 1208 (9th Cir. 2019).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm v. Wilson (1st Cir. 2016).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Svejda (D. Neb. 2023).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Avila (N.D. Tex. 2024).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(1)(A) — 6 cases

Cftc v. James Crombie, 914 F.3d 1208 (9th Cir. 2019).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Winston Reed Investments L.L.C. (W.D.N.C. 2021).

U S Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Powderly IV (N.D. Ill. 2019).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Avila (N.D. Tex. 2024).

Camelart Ltd. v. Stonex Grp. Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2021).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(1)(B) — 3 cases

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Fan Wang, 261 F. Supp. 3d 383 (S.D.N.Y. 2017).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Winston Reed Investments L.L.C. (W.D.N.C. 2021).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2) — 16 cases

Nguyen v. FXCM Inc., 364 F. Supp. 3d 227 (S.D. Ill. 2019).

United States v. James Brooks, 681 F.3d 678 (5th Cir. 2012). “Similarly, 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2) renders it unlawful for “any person, in or in connection with any order to make .”

United States Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Hunter Wise Commodities, LLC, 21 F. Supp. 3d 1317 (S.D. Fla. 2014).

Chu v. U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 823 F.3d 1245 (9th Cir. 2016).

Societe Nationale D'Exploitation Industrielle Des Tabacslumettes v. Salomon Bros. Int'l Ltd., 928 F. Supp. 398 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(A) — 27 cases

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. PMC Strategy, LLC, 903 F. Supp. 2d 368 (W.D.N.C. 2012).

United States Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Driver, 877 F. Supp. 2d 968 (C.D. Cal. 2012).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Monex Credit Co., 311 F. Supp. 3d 1173 (C.D. Cal. 2018).

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Allied Markets LLC, 371 F. Supp. 3d 1035 (M.D. Fla. 2019).

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Arrington, 998 F. Supp. 2d 847 (D. Neb. 2014).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(B) — 3 cases

United States v. James Brooks, 681 F.3d 678 (5th Cir. 2012). “Similarly, 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2) renders it unlawful for “any person, in or in connection with any order to make .”

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. PMC Strategy, LLC, 903 F. Supp. 2d 368 (W.D.N.C. 2012).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Fin. Tree (E.D. Cal. 2022).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(C)(i) — 4 cases

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Risk Capital Trading Grp., Inc., 452 F. Supp. 2d 1229 (N.D. Ga. 2006).

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Wilson, 19 F. Supp. 3d 352 (D. Mass. 2014).

Us Commodity Futures Trading Com'n v. Rolando, 589 F. Supp. 2d 159 (D. Conn. 2008).

United States Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Rolando, 589 F. Supp. 2d 159 (D. Conn. 2008).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(D)(i) — 1 case

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. States, 673 F. Supp. 2d 1320 (S.D. Fla. 2009).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(D)(ii) — 1 case

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. States, 673 F. Supp. 2d 1320 (S.D. Fla. 2009).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(a) — 1 case

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Worldwidemarkets, Ltd. (D.N.J. 2022).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(i) — 9 cases

United States Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Kratville, 796 F.3d 873 (8th Cir. 2015).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. UForex Consulting, LLC., 551 F. Supp. 2d 513 (W.D. La. 2008).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Carnegie Trading Grp., Ltd., 450 F. Supp. 2d 788 (N.D. Ohio 2006).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Risk Capital Trading Grp., Inc., 452 F. Supp. 2d 1229 (N.D. Ga. 2006).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Foreign Fund, 549 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (M.D. Tenn. 2008).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(ii) — 2 cases

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. States, 674 F. Supp. 2d 1311 (S.D. Fla. 2009).

Us Commodity Futures Trading Com'n v. States, 674 F. Supp. 2d 1311 (S.D. Fla. 2009).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(I) — 1 case

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Noble Wealth Data Info. Servs., Inc., 90 F. Supp. 2d 676 (D. Maryland 2000).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(i) — 17 cases

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Weinberg, 287 F. Supp. 2d 1100 (C.D. Cal. 2003).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Rosenberg, 85 F. Supp. 2d 424 (D.N.J. 2000). “Rosenberg Committed Futures and Options Fraud in Violation of 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a),6c(b) and 17 U.S.C. § 33.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, Cross v. Anthony Vartuli, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, Avco Fin. Corp., J. Michael Gent, 228 F.3d 94 (2d Cir. 2000).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. JBW Capital, LLC, 812 F.3d 98 (1st Cir. 2016). “We refer to the current version of 7 U.S.C. § 6b. 15 . Later in his brief, Wilson appears to abandon-this position and contend — without identifying any redOrd evidence to support his assertion — that'"the CFTC has failed to submit any material, undisputed evidence of a…”

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(ii) — 2 cases

Kolbeck v. LIT Am., Inc., 923 F. Supp. 557 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Thomas W. Collins, 997 F.2d 1230 (7th Cir. 1993).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(iv) — 4 cases

Rosner v. Bank of China, 528 F. Supp. 2d 419 (S.D.N.Y. 2007).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Noble Wealth Data Info. Servs., Inc., 90 F. Supp. 2d 676 (D. Maryland 2000).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Baragosh, 278 F.3d 319 (4th Cir. 2002).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(l) — 3 cases

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. AVCO Fin. Corp., 979 F. Supp. 232 (S.D.N.Y. 1997).

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Wilson, 19 F. Supp. 3d 352 (D. Mass. 2014).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(l)(A) — 3 cases

United States Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Kratville, 796 F.3d 873 (8th Cir. 2015).

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Bradley Miklovich, 687 F. App'x 449 (6th Cir. 2017).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(c) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Lee, 720 F. Supp. 2d 305 (S.D.N.Y. 2010).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(d) — 1 case

Ping He (Hai Nam) Co. v. Nonferrous Metals (U.S.A.) Inc., 22 F. Supp. 2d 94 (S.D.N.Y. 1998).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(e)(3) — 2 cases

Krukever v. TD Ameritrade, Inc., 337 F. Supp. 3d 1227 (S.D. Fla. 2018).

Rees-Evans v. AMP Global Clearing, LLC (N.D. Ill. 2021).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(l)(A) — 2 cases

United States v. Josten, 704 F. Supp. 841 (N.D. Ill. 1989).

United States v. Scheck, 783 F. Supp. 1109 (N.D. Ill. 1991).

— 7 U.S.C. § 6b(l)(D) — 1 case

John H. Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 145 F.3d 910 (7th Cir. 1998).

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.