On Friday, March 9, Atlantic Trading USA LLC (Atlantic) filed a class action complaint in Chicago federal court against numerous unnamed trading firms, alleging manipulation of the Chicago Board Options Volatility Index (VIX). Atlantic alleges that, from 2011 to the present, trading firms have manipulated the VIX settlement price by placing aggressive buy orders during the HOSS auction and then taking advantage of the artificially high VIX settlement price to cash out of expiring long VIX derivatives at a profit. Atlantic claims to represent a nationwide class of investors that has traded VIX futures or options since 2011 and seeks damages “in the hundreds of millions of dollars.” The case is captioned Atlantic Trading USA LLC. V. John Does 1-100, 18-cv-01754 (N.D.Ill.), and the complaint can be found here.
Similar class action complaints were recently filed in New York federal court, alleging collusive and manipulative VIX trading in violation of the Sherman and Clayton Acts, respectively. Those cases are captioned Samuel v. John Does 1-100, 18-cv-01593-AT (S.D.N.Y.) and David Quint v. DRW Holdings and John Does, 18-cv-01980-AT.
Plaintiffs in these cases are serving subpoenas on the Chicago Board Options Exchange and the Chicago Futures Exchange to obtain information sufficient to identify the firms involved in the trading activity at issue. We expect this process to take at least one month and, more likely, it will probably require several months. In the meantime, as a protective measure, trading firms should consider retaining, in addition to their routine account statements and order flow records, any other records reflecting HOSS order imbalances and the firm’s own objective risk and value assessments that formed the basis for their trading decisions during this time.
Steve Bedell, Katie Trkla, Tom Krebs, and Ellen Wheeler have represented numerous clients in numerous VIX-related regulatory proceedings and have defended regulators’ allegations of VIX manipulation arising from SPX order activity in the HOSS on VIX settlement day − an issue central to these lawsuits. For more about our team and our experience in this area, please contact us or visit Foley.com.
Similar class action complaints were recently filed in New York federal court, alleging collusive and manipulative VIX trading in violation of the Sherman and Clayton Acts, respectively. Those cases are captioned Samuel v. John Does 1-100, 18-cv-01593-AT (S.D.N.Y.) and David Quint v. DRW Holdings and John Does, 18-cv-01980-AT.
Plaintiffs in these cases are serving subpoenas on the Chicago Board Options Exchange and the Chicago Futures Exchange to obtain information sufficient to identify the firms involved in the trading activity at issue. We expect this process to take at least one month and, more likely, it will probably require several months. In the meantime, as a protective measure, trading firms should consider retaining, in addition to their routine account statements and order flow records, any other records reflecting HOSS order imbalances and the firm’s own objective risk and value assessments that formed the basis for their trading decisions during this time.
Steve Bedell, Katie Trkla, Tom Krebs, and Ellen Wheeler have represented numerous clients in numerous VIX-related regulatory proceedings and have defended regulators’ allegations of VIX manipulation arising from SPX order activity in the HOSS on VIX settlement day − an issue central to these lawsuits. For more about our team and our experience in this area, please contact us or visit Foley.com.
Author(s)
Related Insights
02 August 2024
Events
Texas Environmental Superconference – PFAS: From Here to Eternity
Dottie Watson will be speaking during the panel “PFAS: From Here to Eternity” during the Texas Environmental Superconference.
17 July 2024
Viewpoints
New York Department of Financial Services Issues New Guidance Concerning the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Insurance– What You Need to Know
On July 11, 2024, the New York Department of Financial Services issued Insurance Circular Letter No. 7 adopting guidance regarding the use of artificial intelligence in underwriting and pricing decisions.
17 July 2024
Innovative Technology Insights
USPTO Clarifies Patent-Eligibility Guidelines for AI Inventions
Effective July 17, 2024 the USPTO has provided an update to its 2019 guidance on patent eligibility for AI innovations.