OPENING STATEMENT AT PUBLIC MEETING ABOUT IOSCO REPORT ON COMMODITY DERIVATIVES MARKETS

CFTC Commissioner Michael V. Dunn provided the opening statement on the Iosco report at the open meeting on the regulation and supervision of commodity derivatives. The following is an excerpt from the CFTC website: September 8, 2011 "Thank you all for joining us today for this important public meeting. Today, we consider the IOSCO report on Principles for the Regulation and Supervision of Commodity Derivatives Markets. Over the past few years, and particularly in the aftermath of the financial crisis in 2008, it has become clear to us all that what we do here in the U.S. affects markets around the world. Similarly, actions taken around the world affect the markets here. This global interdependency places a responsibility on regulators to not only understand what the impacts of our actions will be on our markets, but also what the global impacts of our actions will be. Global interdependency also requires us to be aware of how to protect our markets from the negative impacts of actions taken in other financial markets. I have for some time emphasized the need for the world’s regulatory bodies to work in harmony to prevent a future financial crisis, and, if another crisis should occur, to face it on a global playing field. The report we consider today represents an important first step toward this harmonization. The IOSCO report establishes internationally accepted principles for the regulation and supervision of commodity derivatives markets. It is my sincere hope that the principles established in the report will lead to meaningful – and consistent – financial regulatory oversight on a global scale. In addition to the IOSCO report, we also consider today two proposed rules regarding implementation and compliance dates for final rules related to the Dodd-Frank Act. I would like to commend the Chairman and his staff for their transparent approach to these issues. Once the vast majority of Dodd-Frank proposed rules had been completed earlier this year, the Chairman determined that public comment regarding implementation phasing would be useful. On May 2-3, the CFTC and the SEC held a joint roundtable on issues related to implementation. Commission staff proposed 13 concepts to be considered, and staff asked a series of questions based on the concepts outlined. In addition, the Commission reopened the comment period on many of the proposed rules until June 3, 2011, in order to allow for comments from the public regarding the entire mosaic of rules. The comments made at the roundtable and in the comment letters from various market participants and the public raised key themes that shaped today’s proposed rules. While I understand that there are some who would like even greater clarity regarding the timing of implementation, and I welcome the public’s comments and suggestions during the comment period, I believe that the proposed rules provide clarity for the industry while simultaneously providing the Commission with the flexibility and information it needs to fashion effective final rules. I would like to again thank the Chairman for the transparent process and for his responsiveness to the questions and concerns of my fellow Commissioners. I would also like to thank the staff for all of their hard work in producing these proposed rules. I appreciate their efforts and look forward to their presentations.”

ALLEGED INSIDE TRADERS AT TRIVIUM CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, AGREE TO SETTLEMENT WITH SEC

“The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that, on July 18, 2011, the Honorable Jed S. Rakoff of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a consent judgment against Defendant Robert Feinblatt in SEC v. Feinblatt, 11-CV-0170, an insider trading case the SEC filed on January 10, 2011. Feinblatt was a co-founder and former principal of Trivium Capital Management LLC, a New York-based hedge fund investment adviser that has since wound down its investment management business. Previously, on July 11, 2011, the Court entered a consent judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Yokuty, formerly an analyst who reported to Feinblatt at Trivium. The Complaint alleged that Feinblatt and Yokuty engaged in insider trading in the securities of Polycom, Hilton, Google and Kronos. The complaint further alleged that a senior executive at Polycom and an employee at Market Street Partners, an investor relations firm that did work for Google, tipped Roomy Khan, an individual investor, to inside information that Khan passed on to Feinblatt and Yokuty. The Complaint alleged that Feinblatt and Yokuty then traded on the basis of this and other inside information given to them by Khan on behalf of Trivium’s hedge funds, reaping illicit profits for the funds of more than $15 million. To settle the SEC’s charges, Feinblatt consented to the entry of a judgment that: (i) permanently enjoins him from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; and (ii) orders him to pay disgorgement of $829,765, plus $186,023 in prejudgment interest, plus a civil penalty of $1,659,530. Yokuty consented to the entry of a judgment that: (i) permanently enjoins him from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; and (ii) orders him to pay disgorgement of $127,595.10, plus $34,935.12 in prejudgment interest, plus a civil penalty of $127,595.10. In separate administrative proceedings, instituted against Feinblatt on September 2, 2011, and Yokuty on July 22, 2011, Feinblatt and Yokuty each consented to be barred from association with any broker, dealer, investment adviser, municipal securities dealer, or transfer agent. Feinblatt may apply for reentry after 5 years and Yokuty may apply for reentry after 3 years.”

SEC CHAIRMAN SCHAPIRO STATEMENT ON COURT''S VACATING SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS RULE

The following is an excerpt from the SEC website: "Washington, D.C., Sept. 6, 2011 – The Securities and Exchange Commission today confirmed that it is not seeking rehearing of the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. vacating a Commission rule, Rule 14a-11, which would have required companies to include shareholders' director nominees in company proxy materials in certain circumstances. Nor will the SEC seek Supreme Court review. Chairman Mary L. Schapiro issued the following statement: "I firmly believe that providing a meaningful opportunity for shareholders to exercise their right to nominate directors at their companies is in the best interest of investors and our markets. It is a process that helps make boards more accountable for the risks undertaken by the companies they manage. I remain committed to finding a way to make it easier for shareholders to nominate candidates to corporate boards. "At the same time, I want to be sure that we carefully consider and learn from the Court's objections as we determine the best path forward. I have asked the staff to continue reviewing the decision as well as the comments that we previously received from interested parties." Last year, when the Commission adopted Rule 14a-11, it also adopted amendments to Rule 14a-8, the shareholder proposal rule. Under those amendments, eligible shareholders are permitted to require companies to include shareholder proposals regarding proxy access procedures in company proxy materials. Through this procedure, shareholders and companies have the opportunity to establish proxy access standards on a company-by-company basis -- rather than a specified standard like that contained in Rule 14a-11. Although the amendments to Rule 14a-8 were not challenged in the litigation, the Commission voluntarily stayed the effective date of those amendments at the time it stayed the effective date of Rule 14a-11. The Commission's stay order provides that the stay of the effective date of the amendments to Rule 14a-8 and related rules will expire without further Commission action when the court's decision is finalized, which is expected to be September 13. Accordingly, absent further Commission action, Rule 14a-8 will go into effect and a notice of the effective date of the amendments will be published.

SEC FILES CIVIL INJUNCTION AGAINST INVESTMENT ADVISOR AND PRINCIPAL FOR MISREPRESENTATIONS REGARDING THE FOREX MARKET

The following excerpt is from the SEC website: “The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that, on September 8, 2011, it filed a civil injunctive action in federal district court in Massachusetts against registered investment adviser EagleEye Asset Management, LLC, and its sole principal, Jeffrey A. Liskov, both of Plymouth, MA, in connection their fraudulent conduct toward advisory clients. In its complaint, the Commission alleges that, between at least April 2008 and August 2010, Liskov made material misrepresentations to nearly a dozen advisory clients to induce them to liquidate investments in securities and instead invest the proceeds in foreign currency exchange (“forex”) trading. These investments, which were not suitable for older clients with conservative investment goals, resulted in steep losses for clients, totaling nearly $4 million, but EagleEye and Liskov came away with over $300,000 in performance fees on these investments alone, in addition to other management fees they collected from clients. Liskov’s strategy was to generate temporary profits on client forex investments to enable him to collect performance fees, after which client investments invariably would sharply decline in value. According to the Commission’s complaint, Liskov’s material misrepresentations to clients concerned the nature of forex investments, the risks involved, and his expertise and track record in forex trading. As to some clients, Liskov did not explain what forex trading was at all. As to other clients, Liskov downplayed the risks of forex investments. Liskov also falsely told several clients that he had had prior success in forex trading, when in fact he had lost substantial sums of his own or other clients’ money in forex trading when he made such statements. The Commission’s complaint further alleges that, in the case of two clients, without their knowledge or consent, Liskov liquidated securities in their brokerage accounts and transferred the proceeds to their forex trading accounts where he lost nearly all client funds, but not before first collecting performance fees for EagleEye (and ultimately himself) on short-lived profits in the clients’ forex accounts. The complaint alleges that Liskov accomplished the unauthorized transfers by doctoring asset transfer forms. On several occasions, Liskov took old forms signed by the clients and used “white out” correction fluid to change dates, asset transfer amounts, and other data. Liskov also used similar tactics to open multiple forex trading accounts in the name of one client, thereby maximizing his ability to earn performance fees for EagleEye (and ultimately himself) on the client’s investments, all without disclosing this to the client or obtaining the client’s consent. The Commission’s complaint alleges that, by the foregoing conduct, EagleEye and Liskov violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The Commission further alleges that EagleEye failed to maintain certain books and records required of investment advisers in violation of Section 204 of the Advisers Act and Rule 204-2(a) thereunder, and that Liskov aided and abetted EagleEye’s violations of these provisions. The Commission seeks a permanent injunction, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest thereon, and the imposition of a monetary penalty against both EagleEye and Liskov.”

CFTC SETTLES CHARGES OF FRAUD WITH OFF-EXCHANGE FOREIGN CURRENCY DEALER

The following is from the CFTC website: “Washington, DC – The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today filed and simultaneously settled charges that Roy Scarboro, Jr. of Archdale, N.C., fraudulently solicited approximately $713,000 from customers to trade off-exchange foreign currency (forex). The CFTC order also finds that Scarboro misappropriated funds for his personal use and issued false account statements to conceal that he lost most of the funds trading. Scarboro has never been registered with the CFTC. The CFTC order requires Scarboro to pay a $350,000 civil monetary penalty. The order also permanently prohibits Scarboro from trading on a CFTC-registered entity and from registering or seeking exemption from registration with the CFTC. According to the CFTC order, beginning in or about June 2009, Scarboro solicited and accepted approximately $713,000 from at least six individuals for the purpose of trading off-exchange leveraged forex through a pool named Capital Asset Management Fund, L.P. (CAMF). Scarboro was CAMF’s General Partner and Manager. In his solicitations, Scarboro represented to at least one participant that only 20 percent of CAMF’s funds would be used to trade forex, with the remainder being invested in U.S. Treasuries. In fact, Scarboro used participants’ funds to trade forex only and never invested in any type of U.S. Treasury instrument, according to the order. The CFTC order further finds that Scarboro deposited approximately $612,000 in forex trading accounts at registered Futures Commission Merchants. He sustained consistent losses as a result of his trading, with no profitable months, and lost approximately $597,000 of his participants’ funds, according to the order. To conceal his trading losses, the order finds, Scarboro issued false monthly account statements to CAMF’s participants that showed at various times that the participants were either making modest profits or incurring only modest losses. In addition, Scarboro falsely reported to participants on these account statements that he was taking no allocation of the profits for himself as CAMF’s General Partner. The order also finds that Scarboro misappropriated at least $59,000 of participants’ funds. In a related criminal proceeding, Scarboro was sentenced on May 4, 2011 to 26 months imprisonment and required to pay $682,663.62 in restitution (United States v. Roy E. Scarboro, Case Number 3:10-cr-254 (W.D.N.C.))."

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA WAS CLOSED AND THE DEPOSITS WILL BE ASSUMED BY CHARTERBANK OF GEORGIA

The following is an excerpt from a press release e-mail sent out by the FDIC: “The First National Bank of Florida, Milton, Florida, was closed today by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver. To protect the depositors, the FDIC entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with CharterBank, West Point, Georgia, to assume all of the deposits of The First National Bank of Florida. The eight branches of The First National Bank of Florida will reopen during their normal business hours beginning Saturday as branches of CharterBank. Depositors of The First National Bank of Florida will automatically become depositors of CharterBank. Deposits will continue to be insured by the FDIC, so there is no need for customers to change their banking relationship in order to retain their deposit insurance coverage up to applicable limits. Customers of The First National Bank of Florida should continue to use their existing branch until they receive notice from CharterBank that it has completed systems changes to allow other CharterBank branches to process their accounts as well. This evening and over the weekend, depositors of The First National Bank of Florida can access their money by writing checks or using ATM or debit cards. Checks drawn on the bank will continue to be processed. Loan customers should continue to make their payments as usual. As of June 30, 2011, The First National Bank of Florida had approximately $296.8 million in total assets and $280.1 million in total deposits. In addition to assuming all of the deposits of the failed bank, CharterBank agreed to purchase essentially all of the assets. The FDIC and CharterBank entered into a loss-share transaction on $216.3 million of The First National Bank of Florida's assets. CharterBank will share in the losses on the asset pools covered under the loss-share agreement. The loss-share transaction is projected to maximize returns on the assets covered by keeping them in the private sector. The transaction also is expected to minimize disruptions for loan customers. The FDIC estimates that the cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) will be $46.9 million. Compared to other alternatives, CharterBank's acquisition was the least costly resolution for the FDIC's DIF. The First National Bank of Florida is the 71st FDIC-insured institution to fail in the nation this year, and the eleventh in Florida. The last FDIC-insured institution closed in the state was Lydian Private Bank, Palm Beach, on August 19, 2011.”