COMEX 10-07-BC and 10-07974-BC
Roger Punj (RKP)
432.L.3. General Offense
To fail to produce any books or records requested by duly authorized Exchange staff, in the format and medium specified in the request, within 10 days after such request is made or such shorter period of time as determined by the Market Regulation Department in exigent circumstances;
432.Q. General Offense
To commit an act which is detrimental to the interest or welfare of the Exchange or to engage in any conduct which tends to impair the dignity or good name of the Exchange;
432.R. General Offense
To fail to submit to an arbitration any dispute which Exchange staff, an arbitration panel or the Board decides should be arbitrated pursuant to Chapter 6; or to fail to comply with a final arbitration award;
The New York Mercantile Exchange took final disciplinary action against Roger Punj (also known as Broker Badge “RKP”, “Rajeev Punj”, and hereinafter “Punj”), a former COMEX Lessee member, who was a dual trader at all times relevant. On January 28, 2011, the COMEX BCC Hearing Panel Chair held that Punj failed to file an answer to the Docket No. 10-07 Charging Memorandum, and that by failing to answer, all the charges against Punj are deemed admitted and Punj’s right to a hearing on the charges is deemed waived. On February 28, 2011, the COMEX BCC Hearing Panel Chair held that Punj failed to deny the charge against him in the Docket No. 10-07974 Charging Memorandum, Punj’s failure to deny this charge is deemed admission, and Punj’s right to a hearing on the charges is deemed waived. The COMEX BCC Hearing Panel Chair also held that these matters were consolidated for presentation purposes. After a hearing on April 27, 2011, the COMEX BCC Panel (“the BCC Panel”) found that Punj failed to produce requested trade records, failed to appear for scheduled interviews with Market Regulation; used his membership privileges in a manner that is detrimental to the interest or welfare of the Exchange or resulted in a violation of Exchange Rules of the Commodity Exchange Act, and committed acts detrimental to the interest or welfare of the Exchange or engaged in any conduct which tends to impair the dignity or good name of the Exchange. (Docket No. 10-07). In addition, the BCC Panel found Punj failed to present proof of timely payment of an Arbitration award ordered by an arbitration panel of the Exchange. (Docket No. 10-07974).
In so doing, the BCC Panel found Punj violated NYMEX Rules 432.L.3., 432.Q. (Docket No. 10-07) and NYMEX Rule 432.R. (Docket No. 10-07974); and held that these matters should be consolidated for sanctioning purposes.
In accordance with its findings, the BCC Panel ordered that Punj (i) pay a fine to the Exchange in the amount of $50,000; (ii) accept a bar from reapplication to the Exchange in any capacity and from directly or indirectly accessing (trading, entering orders or soliciting business) any trading floor and electronic trading or clearing platform owned or controlled by the CME Group for one (1) year starting on the first business day after effective date of the order and ending the latter of one year after the first business day after effective date of the order or one year after a) payment of the ordered fine amount, and b) submission of proof of payment in full to the Cervinis of the $200,000 arbitration award ordered by the arbitration panel under Arbitration Docket No. C-49 and confirmed by the Supreme Court of the State of New York Suffolk County (Index No. 40349/10); and (iii) an order to cease and desist from subsequent similar rule violations. The BCC Panel’s decision became final on May 3, 2011.
Also on May 3, 2011, Punj filed a request for an appeal to an Appellate Panel of the COMEX Board of Directors (the “Appellate Panel”) related to the sanctions levied by the BCC Panel. Upon considering Punj’s May 3, 2011, Request for Appeal, a supplemental request Punj submitted on May 20, 2011, and the Market Regulation Department’s Response, on June 8, 2011, the Appellate Panel determined that no reasonable basis exists to conclude that Punj would be able to meet the standards for appeal, as set forth in Rule 411, which would have allowed the Appellate Panel to set aside, modify, or amend the decision or sanction issued by the BCC Panel. Accordingly, the decision of the Appellate Panel became the final decision of the Exchange on June 8, 2011, and the sanctions levied by the BCC Panel shall become effective as of the date below.
July 5, 2011