Notes of Decisions
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353 (1982).
· cites it 2× “…88 Stat. 1398 -1400, 1414 (adding §§ 4n, 4 o, and amending § 9(c) of the CEA, codified as subsequently amended, 7 U. S. C. §§ 6n, 6 o, 13 (1976 ed. and Supp. IV)). [35] § 209 of the 1974 amendments, 88 Stat. 1401 (adding § 5a(11) of the CEA, codified as subsequently…”
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. British Am. Commodity Options Corp., 560 F.2d 135 (2d Cir. 1977).
· cites it 3× “7 U.S.C. § 6n(2) provides: “Except as hereinafter provided, such registration shall become effective thirty days after the receipt of such application by the Commission, or within such shorter period of time as the Commission may determine.”
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. British Am. Commodity Options Corp., 422 F. Supp. 662 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).
· cites it 7× “7 U.S.C. § 6n (7) The Commission after hearing may by order deny registration, revoke or suspend the registration of any commodity trading advisor or commodity pool operator if the Commission finds that such denial, revocation, or suspension is in the public interest and that—…”
United States v. Steven Sawyer, Harvey M. Bloch, Allen C. Leavitt, 799 F.2d 1494 (11th Cir. 1986).
“SMC was registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) as a commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6n (1982). 4 . A long-term futures pool traded in a single commodity.”
New York Currency Rsch. Corp. v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 180 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 1999).
· cites it 2× “Hearing and ALJ Initial Decision Nearly three months later, on December 17, 1997, the Division filed a single count complaint alleging that the failure to produce the documents violated § 4n(3)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act (Act), codified at 7 U.S.C. § 6n(3)(A), and CFTC…”
Jack W. Savage v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 548 F.2d 192 (7th Cir. 1977).
“7 U.S.C. § 6n (Supp. V 1975). 4 On March 7, 1975, he made his application to be registered; and on July 25, 1975, the Commission ordered a public hearing pursuant to Section 8a of the Act, 7 U.”
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Lake Shore Asset Mgmt. Ltd., 496 F.3d 769 (7th Cir. 2007).
“The Commodity Futures Trading Commission believes that Lake Shore Asset Management, a commodity-pool operator and adviser in the derivatives business, has failed to produce on demand the records required by 7 U.S.C. § 6n(3)(A) and the corresponding regulations, 17 C.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(1)(A) — 1 case
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(2) — 2 cases
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. British Am. Commodity Options Corp., 422 F. Supp. 662 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).
“7 U.S.C. § 6n (7) The Commission after hearing may by order deny registration, revoke or suspend the registration of any commodity trading advisor or commodity pool operator if the Commission finds that such denial, revocation, or suspension is in the public interest and that—…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(3) — 1 case
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(3)(A) — 9 cases
New York Currency Rsch. Corp. v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 180 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 1999).
“Hearing and ALJ Initial Decision Nearly three months later, on December 17, 1997, the Division filed a single count complaint alleging that the failure to produce the documents violated § 4n(3)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act (Act), codified at 7 U.S.C. § 6n(3)(A), and CFTC…”
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Lake Shore Asset Mgmt. Ltd., 496 F.3d 769 (7th Cir. 2007).
“The Commodity Futures Trading Commission believes that Lake Shore Asset Management, a commodity-pool operator and adviser in the derivatives business, has failed to produce on demand the records required by 7 U.S.C. § 6n(3)(A) and the corresponding regulations, 17 C.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(4) — 1 case
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(6) — 2 cases
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. British Am. Commodity Options Corp., 422 F. Supp. 662 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).
“7 U.S.C. § 6n (7) The Commission after hearing may by order deny registration, revoke or suspend the registration of any commodity trading advisor or commodity pool operator if the Commission finds that such denial, revocation, or suspension is in the public interest and that—…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(7) — 2 cases
Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. British Am. Commodity Options Corp., 422 F. Supp. 662 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).
“7 U.S.C. § 6n (7) The Commission after hearing may by order deny registration, revoke or suspend the registration of any commodity trading advisor or commodity pool operator if the Commission finds that such denial, revocation, or suspension is in the public interest and that—…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 6n(l) — 1 case
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.