Why is the transmission of the certified record described as the act that must occur before National Adjudicatory Council review can begin at all?

Because the Council's jurisdiction over an appeal attaches only once the certified record has physically arrived with it, so that any step taken before its arrival would be a nullity

Because the Council's review asks whether the findings rest on substantial evidence and the conclusions are correct in law, neither of which can be judged without the whole record

Because the parties' time for filing their appellate briefs cannot begin to run until each of them has been served with the record itself

Because the Hearing Panel remains seized of the matter until it has transferred the record, and two bodies cannot hold one proceeding

What competing considerations does the length of the record transmission deadline reflect?

Getting the record to the appellate body quickly, against giving each of the parties time to object to particular items before the record is closed

Giving the appealing party time to narrow the issues, against the appellate body's interest in receiving a complete file at the outset

Getting the record to the appellate body quickly, against the work of assembling and indexing one that may be very large in a multi-respondent case

Giving the Hearing Officer time to reconsider the decision, against the appellate body's interest in taking up the matter promptly

Specific problems emerge with the completeness of a record or the preparation of its index. What does the framework provide for?

Counsel to the Council may direct the Office of Hearing Officers to complete the transmission

The appeal is held in abeyance until the certifying Hearing Officer resolves the problem

The parties may jointly stipulate which items the incomplete record should be taken to contain

The matter returns to the Hearing Panel for a fresh determination on the completed record

How does the allocation of scheduling authority in appellate proceedings differ from the allocation at the hearing level?

It rests with the parties at the appellate level by agreement, where at the hearing level it is imposed by the Hearing Officer

It is spread across several bodies at the appellate level, where at the hearing level one Hearing Officer holds unified case management authority

It is spread across several bodies at both levels, differing only in how many of them may act on a given request

It rests with a single officer at the appellate level, where at the hearing level it is shared between the Hearing Officer and the Panel

A notice of appeal is filed with the Office of Hearing Officers on Monday, 4 May 2026. Monday, 25 May 2026 is Memorial Day, a Federal holiday. When does FINRA Rule 9321's 21-day period for transmitting the record end?

At the end of Wednesday, 3 June 2026

At the end of Monday, 25 May 2026

At the end of Tuesday, 26 May 2026

At the end of Friday, 22 May 2026

The Office of Hearing Officers cannot assemble the supplemental record and amended index within the seven-day period that FINRA Rule 9321 sets for a supplemental record. What does FINRA Rule 9321 provide for?

The National Adjudicatory Council may designate a later time, as it may for the main record

Nothing; the seven-day period is fixed, unlike the 21-day period for the main record

The Council may designate a later time, but only until the Review Subcommittee begins reviewing the order

The Office sends what it has within the seven days, and the rest follows as a further supplement

An appealing respondent files its notice of appeal with the Office of Hearing Officers and serves it on the Department of Enforcement by first class mail. How does the mail service affect the Office's 21-day period for transmitting the record under FINRA Rule 9321?

It moves the start of the Office's period to the day on which Enforcement actually receives the notice in the post

It has none, because the period runs from the filing and mail days are added to a period for response

It adds three days to the Office's period, because the notice that started that period was served by first class mail

It adds three days to the Office's period, but only where the twenty-first day would otherwise fall on a weekend

A default decision is issued under FINRA Rule 9269 and the respondent does not appeal. Within 25 days after service, the General Counsel, on his or her own motion, calls the decision for review and files the written notice of review with the Office of Hearing Officers. What does that filing do?

It starts the Office's period only if the respondent, once served with the notice, elects to take part in the review

Nothing for the record, since a default decision is reached without any hearing record that could be transmitted

It starts the Office's 21-day period for transmitting the record, as a notice of call for review under FINRA Rule 9312

Nothing until the Council asks for the record, the General Counsel having no power of their own to call for review

The Department of Enforcement moves under FINRA Rule 9285(a) for conditions to be imposed on a respondent pending appeal, and the Hearing Officer denies the motion. What does FINRA Rule 9321 then require of the Office of Hearing Officers?

A fresh transmission of the main record within 21 days, with the motion papers added to it

A supplemental record within seven days of the denial, so that the ruling can be reviewed

A supplemental record within seven days of Enforcement's motion, the motion having been filed

No supplemental transmission, since no order imposing conditions or restrictions has issued

The Office of Hearing Officers transmits a supplemental record to the National Adjudicatory Council under FINRA Rule 9321. What does the rule require as to that supplemental record's completeness?

Certification that it is complete, by the Hearing Officer who participated in the proceeding or the Chief Hearing Officer

No certification of its own, the certification already given for the main record extending to what is added to it

Certification by the participating Hearing Officer or the Chief Hearing Officer, but only if a Party disputes its completeness

Certification by the participating Hearing Officer or the Chief Hearing Officer that the amended index matches the main index

While a respondent's appeal is pending before the National Adjudicatory Council, briefs, motions and orders are filed in it. Who has authority to create and maintain the official record of the disciplinary proceeding on appeal?

The Chief Hearing Officer, as head of the office that assembled and transmitted the record

Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council, among whose powers that function is listed

The Hearing Officer who presided, whose power over the record lasts until the appeal is decided

The Subcommittee appointed to hear the appeal, as the body that reviews the record

The certified record transmitted to the National Adjudicatory Council in an appeal covers a multi-week hearing and thousands of pages of exhibits. What may the volume and complexity of that record lead to?

An automatic lengthening of the periods for filing briefs, fixed by reference to the number of pages in the record

Review of the appeal by the full Council sitting as one body, a Subcommittee not being used for a record of that size

Designation of the case as an Extended Proceeding, with an Extended Proceeding Committee appointed instead of a Subcommittee

Division of the appeal among several Subcommittees, each of them reviewing a separate part of the certified record

A respondent argues on appeal that the Hearing Officer wrongly excluded one of its exhibits, which was attached to the record as a supplemental document. How must the respondent's brief deal with that exhibit?

Leave it to the Subcommittee, which examines every excluded exhibit whose exclusion a Party has challenged

Cite it by its index designation alone, a supplemental document attached to the record being part of that record

Move the Council first to add it to the record, since a brief may not refer to it until that has been done

Set out the substance of the excluded evidence in the brief, in an appendix to it, or by citation to the record

The certified record has just reached the National Adjudicatory Council and no Subcommittee has yet been appointed under FINRA Rule 9331. A Party needs a filing period extended and can show good cause. To whom can it apply under FINRA Rule 9322?

No one yet, since the application has to wait until a Subcommittee is appointed to hear the appeal

The Office of Hearing Officers, which keeps charge of the case until a Subcommittee has been appointed

The Chief Hearing Officer, who acts on scheduling for the Council until an appellate panel is formed

Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council sets the date and time of oral argument in an appeal, and the respondent objects to the date Counsel has chosen. How can the respondent seek review of Counsel's decision?

By raising it only after the Council has decided the appeal, as part of any later application to the SEC for review

By applying at once to the SEC, since Counsel's scheduling rulings are final within FINRA as soon as they are made

By applying to the FINRA Board, which reviews the interlocutory rulings made while an appeal is pending

For good cause shown, Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council wants to move a scheduled oral argument to a different location, and the respondent will not consent. May Counsel make the change under FINRA Rule 9322(b)?

Yes, and without good cause either, the place of argument being an administrative matter for Counsel

No; any change Counsel makes to an oral argument already scheduled needs the consent of the Parties

Yes; the rule's consent exception reaches postponing and adjourning an argument, not changing its location

No; a change in the location of an argument may be ordered only by the Subcommittee hearing the appeal

A respondent's opening brief to the National Adjudicatory Council is due, and the respondent asks the Hearing Officer who presided at the hearing for more time under the Hearing Officer's FINRA Rule 9222 scheduling power. How does the request stand?

It can be granted for good cause, since the Hearing Officer's scheduling power runs until the appeal is decided

It can be granted, since the Hearing Officer's scheduling power lasts until the record reaches the Council

It can be granted, but only with the Department of Enforcement's consent now the case has left the hearing level

It is misdirected, since that power ended when the Hearing Panel's decision was issued

A respondent asks to postpone oral argument before the National Adjudicatory Council. The argument has never been postponed, but the respondent has already been granted two extensions of its briefing deadlines. How do those extensions bear on the request under FINRA Rule 9322(b)?

They fall within the factor that counts the postponements, adjournments or extensions already granted

They are left out, since that factor counts only earlier postponements or adjournments of the argument

They count only if Enforcement opposed them at the time each of the two extensions was granted

They count in the respondent's favour, showing that the timetable already accommodates its needs

Extraordinary circumstances require an oral argument before the National Adjudicatory Council to be held on less than the 21 days' notice FINRA Rule 9341(c) otherwise requires, and the respondent will not consent. Who may still provide for the shorter notice period?

No one, a notice period shorter than 21 days being unavailable once any Party has objected to it

The Subcommittee hearing the appeal, whose power to do so in those circumstances does not depend on consent

Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council, as the official who set the date on which the argument is to be held

The Chief Hearing Officer, on a motion by the Party that wants the argument to be held earlier

Both Parties to an appeal want oral argument held sooner than 21 days' notice would allow, and neither suggests any special urgency. How can the notice period FINRA Rule 9341(c) requires be shortened?

The Council shortens it as of right on a joint oral request

It cannot be; 21 days' notice must be served whatever the Parties prefer

Either Party may waive it alone by asking for an earlier date

A respondent's opening brief to the National Adjudicatory Council will run beyond the page limit for opening briefs, so the respondent needs advance leave to file it. May Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council give that leave?

Yes; Counsel is among those who may give advance leave to file a longer brief

No; leave to file a longer brief is for the adjudicative bodies, Counsel's role being administrative

Yes, but only with the consent of the other Parties to the appeal to the longer brief

No; the Subcommittee hearing the appeal is the one body that may give leave to exceed the limit

An opening brief to the National Adjudicatory Council may not exceed 25 double-spaced pages without advance leave. A respondent's opening brief has 25 pages of argument plus four pages of tables of contents and authorities. Does it need leave?

Yes; tables are left out of a reply brief's count but not an opening brief's

No; pages containing tables of contents or authorities are left out of the count

Yes; every page of the brief is counted, the four pages of tables included

Yes, but only for the tables of authorities, tables of contents being excluded

The Office of Hearing Officers transmits the record and index to the National Adjudicatory Council on day 20 of its 21-day period under FINRA Rule 9321, but serves copies of the index on the Parties on day 25. Has it met the rule?

Yes, provided the Parties' briefing periods are extended by the days of delay

Yes; the period governs transmission to the Council, and service on the Parties may follow

No; serving the index on the Parties falls within the period, as the transmission does

Yes, if no Subcommittee had been appointed by day 25, no Party having needed the index sooner

The scheduling order in an appeal to the National Adjudicatory Council fixes dates for the opening and answering briefs and says nothing about reply briefs. The respondent decides to file a reply. By when must it be filed?

Not later than 21 days after service of the answering brief

Not later than 21 days after the respondent's opening brief was filed

Not later than ten days after the respondent's opening brief was filed

No Party appeals a Hearing Panel decision, and a member of the National Adjudicatory Council calls it for review. The notice of review's statement of what made the call necessary deals only with the sanctions. May the Council consider a finding of violation that is raised in the record?

No; the statement in the notice of review fixes the issues, so the review is confined to the sanctions it names

Yes, once the Parties have been given notice of that issue and an opportunity to submit briefs on it

Yes, and with no further notice to the Parties, the whole record being before the Council once review is called

Only if the respondent asks the Council in its own brief to revisit the finding of violation as well

A respondent appeals a Hearing Panel decision to the National Adjudicatory Council, and the Department of Enforcement files a notice of cross-appeal. The respondent then files a written notice withdrawing its appeal. What becomes of Enforcement's cross-appeal?

It lapses, though Enforcement may file a fresh notice of appeal within 25 days of the withdrawal

It falls with the appeal, a cross-appeal having no existence apart from the appeal it answers

It survives only if a member of the Council calls the decision for review within the time allowed

Oral argument in an appeal is set before a three-member Subcommittee, and one member cannot attend on the date fixed. The Department of Enforcement is content for the other two members to hear the argument; the respondent is not. Who must participate in the oral argument?

All three members, unless the Subcommittee itself finds good cause to proceed with the two who can attend

The two available members, since a Subcommittee of two may hear argument on one Party's agreement

The two available members, since Enforcement as the prosecuting Party may waive full attendance for both sides

All three members, because the Parties have not all agreed to proceed with fewer

FINRA Rule 9320 | Financial Regulation Courses

Transmission of Record; Extensions of Time, Postponements, Adjournments

SERIES 24 | FINANCIAL REGULATION COURSES

FINRA Rule 9320 is the subsection header for the second cluster of rules within the 9300 Review series — the two rules governing the transmission of the official record from the Office of Hearing Officers to the National Adjudicatory Council following the filing of an appeal or call for review, and the scheduling flexibility available throughout the NAC appellate process.

Its title — Transmission of Record; Extensions of Time, Postponements, Adjournments — announces the subject matter of the two substantive rules that follow: FINRA Rule 9321, which governs the twenty-one-day record transmission obligation and the certification of record completeness; and FINRA Rule 9322, which governs the authority of the NAC, its subcommittees, and Counsel to the NAC to extend or shorten filing deadlines, postpone oral argument sessions, and adjourn appellate proceedings.

FINRA Rule 9320 itself has no independent operative text — it functions as the architectural boundary marker delineating the record transmission and scheduling management subsection within the 9300 series.

FINRA Rule 9320 sits within the 9300 Review of Disciplinary Proceeding by National Adjudicatory Council and FINRA Board; Application for SEC Review series as the structural header for the two-rule record transmission and scheduling flexibility subsection. It was adopted as part of the original Code of Procedure by SR-NASD-97-28 effective August 7, 1997 and has been maintained as the subsection header through all subsequent amendments to the rules within it.

The Two Rules Within FINRA Rule 9320's Subsection

FINRA Rule 9321 — Transmission of Record — establishes the mandatory twenty-one-day deadline within which OHO must assemble and prepare an index to the official record, transmit the record and index to the NAC, and serve copies of the index on all parties following the filing of a notice of appeal under FINRA Rule 9311 or a notice of call for review under FINRA Rule 9312, unless the NAC designates a later time.

The rule also requires that the Hearing Officer who participated in the disciplinary proceeding, or the Chief Hearing Officer, certify that the transmitted record is complete.

The certified record transmission is the threshold act that enables NAC appellate review to begin — the NAC cannot assess whether the Hearing Panel's findings are supported by substantial evidence or whether its legal conclusions are correct without access to the complete official record as defined by FINRA Rule 9267.

The twenty-one-day deadline reflects a careful balance between the urgency of transmitting the record to enable prompt appellate review and the administrative complexity of assembling and indexing a potentially voluminous record in complex multi-respondent cases. Counsel to the NAC may direct OHO to complete and transmit the record under FINRA Rule 9313(a)(1), an authority that rule states without any precondition.

FINRA Rule 9322 — Extensions of Time, Postponements, Adjournments — establishes the scheduling flexibility framework for NAC appellate proceedings — the appellate counterpart to FINRA Rule 9222's scheduling flexibility framework for OHO disciplinary proceedings.

The rule grants the NAC, the Review Subcommittee, a Subcommittee, an Extended Proceeding Committee, and Counsel to the NAC the authority to extend or shorten filing periods and postpone or adjourn appellate hearings for good cause shown, at any time prior to the issuance of the NAC's decision under FINRA Rule 9349. The rule includes the same investor harm consideration that FINRA Rule 9222 includes — the potential harm to the investing public from delay is one of the six factors that must be considered when evaluating postponement or adjournment requests.

An important structural protection for parties under FINRA Rule 9322 is that Counsel to the NAC may shorten a briefing period or postpone or adjourn a hearing only with the consent of all parties — a more demanding standard than the general good cause requirement applicable to the adjudicative bodies themselves. This consent requirement prevents Counsel from using administrative scheduling authority to compress the parties' preparation time without their agreement.

The Record Transmission Phase in the Appellate Lifecycle

The rules within FINRA Rule 9320's subsection govern the critical transitional phase between the initiation of NAC appellate review — through FINRA Rule 9311 party appeal or FINRA Rule 9312 call for review — and the constitution of the appellate panel under FINRA Rule 9331. The twenty-one-day record transmission window under FINRA Rule 9321 means that, unless the NAC designates a later time, the NAC has the complete certified official record within approximately three weeks of the appeal or call for review filing, enabling the Subcommittee appointed under FINRA Rule 9331 to begin its substantive appellate review promptly after appointment.

The record index that OHO prepares and serves on all parties under FINRA Rule 9321 is the navigation tool that enables efficient appellate briefing — parties writing their appellate briefs under FINRA Rule 9347 reference the record by the index designations established in the transmitted record, enabling the Subcommittee and ultimately the full NAC to locate specific documents, transcript pages, and exhibits without searching through the full record.

The FINRA Rule 9322 Scheduling Framework in the Appellate Context

The scheduling flexibility framework of FINRA Rule 9322 operates within a more distributed authority structure than FINRA Rule 9222's OHO counterpart — where the Hearing Officer has unified scheduling authority over all OHO proceedings. In the NAC appellate context, scheduling authority is distributed among the NAC itself, the Review Subcommittee, the Subcommittee hearing the appeal, the Extended Proceeding Committee if applicable, and Counsel to the NAC — with Counsel having more limited authority than the adjudicative bodies given the parties' consent requirement for schedule shortening.

This distributed authority structure reflects the different institutional organization of NAC appellate proceedings compared to OHO disciplinary proceedings. OHO proceedings have a single Hearing Officer with unified case management authority under FINRA Rule 9235. NAC appellate proceedings have multiple institutional actors — the Review Subcommittee for initial review, the Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee for substantive appellate consideration, the full NAC for formal decision, and Counsel for administrative management — each with its own scheduling authority appropriate to its specific role.

Counting the Transmission Periods

FINRA Rule 9321 sets two periods for the Office of Hearing Officers. The main record is due within 21 days after the filing of a notice of appeal or notice of call for review. A supplemental record is due within seven days after a Hearing Officer issues an order imposing conditions or restrictions under FINRA Rule 9285. The Code counts both periods under FINRA Rule 9138. A "day" is a calendar day, and the day of the act or event from which the period runs is not counted.

Suppose a respondent files a notice of appeal on Tuesday, 3 March 2026. The count starts on Wednesday, 4 March, and the twenty-first day is Tuesday, 24 March. The weekends inside that period are counted, because FINRA Rule 9138 excludes intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and Federal holidays only when the prescribed period is ten days or less.

The last day is treated differently. If it falls on a Saturday, Sunday or Federal holiday, the period runs until the end of the next day that is none of those. Suppose a notice of appeal is filed on Monday, 4 May 2026. The twenty-first day is Monday, 25 May 2026, which is Memorial Day. The record, the index and the service of the index on the Parties are then due by the end of Tuesday, 26 May.

The seven-day period for a supplemental record is ten days or less, so the intermediate weekends drop out of it. Suppose a Hearing Officer issues an order imposing conditions on Thursday, 15 October 2026. Counting only the weekdays after that day, the seventh day is Monday, 26 October. A count that included the weekend would have ended on Thursday, 22 October, which is too early.

Both periods can be lengthened by the National Adjudicatory Council. Each sentence of FINRA Rule 9321 ends with "or at such later time as the National Adjudicatory Council may designate". The seven-day supplemental period is therefore extendable in the same way as the 21-day period for the main record.

The 21 days run from the filing of the notice. FINRA Rule 9311(c) requires an appealing Party to file the notice with the Office of Hearing Officers and serve it on the Parties. The three extra days in FINRA Rule 9138(c) are added to "the prescribed period for response" when a paper is served by mail. The Office's period is counted from the filing, not from service on a Party, so mailing the notice to the other Party does not lengthen the Office's 21 days.

All three acts fall within the period: assembling and indexing the record, transmitting the record and index to the Council, and serving copies of the index on all Parties. If the Office transmits the record on day 20 but serves the index on the Parties on day 25, it has not met the rule, even though the Council received the record in time.

What Starts a Transmission, and What Does Not

FINRA Rule 9321 names two triggers for the main record: a notice of appeal under FINRA Rule 9311 and a notice of call for review under FINRA Rule 9312. Either Party can appeal. FINRA Rule 9311(a) gives the right to a Respondent or to the Department of Enforcement. Suppose a Hearing Panel dismisses the charges, the respondent naturally does not appeal, and Enforcement files a notice of appeal. The Office of Hearing Officers owes the same 21-day transmission as it would on a respondent's appeal.

A call for review need not come from the Council as a body. A default decision issued under FINRA Rule 9269 is subject to a call for review by the General Counsel, on his or her own motion, within 25 days after service of the decision. The written notice of review is served on each Party and filed with the Office of Hearing Officers. Suppose a respondent who defaulted does not appeal, and the General Counsel calls the default decision for review. The General Counsel's notice is a notice of call for review under FINRA Rule 9312, and its filing starts the Office's 21 days.

The supplemental record has a narrower trigger. It follows an order "imposing conditions or restrictions pursuant to Rule 9285". Suppose Enforcement moves for conditions under FINRA Rule 9285(a) and the Hearing Officer denies the motion. No order imposing conditions or restrictions has issued, so the seven-day supplemental transmission is not triggered.

The certification requirement reaches the supplemental record as well as the main one. The Hearing Officer who participated in the disciplinary proceeding, or the Chief Hearing Officer, certifies that "the record or supplemental record" transmitted to the Council is complete.

The Record Once the Case Reaches the Council

During the hearing, the Hearing Officer's powers include creating and maintaining the official record of the disciplinary proceeding. Once the case is on appeal, that function is listed among Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council's powers: Counsel has authority to "create and maintain the official record of the disciplinary proceeding on appeal or review". Briefs, motions and orders filed during the appeal therefore go into a record that Counsel maintains.

The certified record also informs how the appeal is staffed. Ordinarily the Council or the Review Subcommittee appoints a Subcommittee. FINRA Rule 9331(a)(2) allows them instead to designate the case an Extended Proceeding and appoint an Extended Proceeding Committee "upon consideration of the volume and complexity of the certified record, or other factors" they deem material. Suppose the record the Office transmits covers a multi-week hearing with thousands of pages of exhibits. Its volume and complexity are grounds on which the case may be designated an Extended Proceeding.

An appeal about evidence the Hearing Officer excluded needs particular care in the brief. A document the Hearing Officer did not admit is a supplemental document attached to the record, and it does not constitute part of the record. FINRA Rule 9347(a) deals with exceptions of this kind: "the substance of the evidence admitted or excluded shall be set forth in the brief, an appendix thereto, or by citation to the record." A respondent arguing that an exhibit was wrongly excluded must therefore put the substance of that exhibit before the appellate panel in one of those ways.

Who Can Grant Scheduling Relief at Each Stage of an Appeal

The Hearing Officer's scheduling power under FINRA Rule 9222 lasts "at any time prior to the issuance of the decision of the Hearing Panel". Once the Hearing Panel's decision has issued and been appealed, that power is spent. Suppose a respondent's opening brief to the Council is due and the respondent asks the Hearing Officer who presided for more time. The request belongs instead to a body FINRA Rule 9322 names: the National Adjudicatory Council, the Review Subcommittee, a Subcommittee or, if applicable, an Extended Proceeding Committee, or Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council.

A Subcommittee can exercise its authority only once it has been appointed under FINRA Rule 9331. Before that, the other bodies FINRA Rule 9322 names remain available. Suppose the record has just reached the Council and no Subcommittee has yet been appointed. A Party who needs a filing period extended for good cause can seek it from the National Adjudicatory Council, the Review Subcommittee or Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council.

The consent limit in FINRA Rule 9322 binds Counsel alone. Suppose Enforcement asks for a filing period to be shortened and the respondent objects. Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council cannot shorten the period without the consent of the Parties. A Subcommittee may still shorten it, for good cause shown, over the respondent's objection.

Consent is an additional requirement for Counsel, not a substitute for good cause. The phrase "for good cause shown" governs everything FINRA Rule 9322(a) allows Counsel to do, and the consent clause is an exception layered on top of it. Suppose every Party agrees to a shorter briefing period. Counsel may shorten it only if good cause is also shown.

Lengthening needs no consent. Suppose Enforcement shows good cause for more time to file its answering brief and the respondent objects. Counsel may grant the extension, because the consent clause covers only shortening a period and postponing or adjourning a hearing.

Counsel also sets the date, time and location of oral argument under FINRA Rule 9313(a)(4). Setting the date does not give Counsel a free hand to move it. Suppose Counsel later wants to postpone the argument Counsel scheduled and the respondent will not agree. FINRA Rule 9322 still allows Counsel to postpone or adjourn the argument only with the consent of the Parties.

The consent exception in FINRA Rule 9322(b) names postponing and adjourning only. The same sentence lets each named body, Counsel included, change the location of the oral argument for good cause shown. A change of location by Counsel therefore requires good cause, but the rule's consent exception does not reach it.

A Party unhappy with a ruling by Counsel is not left without recourse. FINRA Rule 9313(b) lets a Party seeking review of a decision of Counsel make a motion to the National Adjudicatory Council, the Review Subcommittee, a Subcommittee or, if applicable, an Extended Proceeding Committee. A respondent who objects to an extension Counsel granted to Enforcement asks one of those bodies to review it by motion.

Weighing a Request to Postpone Oral Argument

FINRA Rule 9322(b) lists what the deciding body must consider on a motion to postpone or adjourn an oral argument. The second factor is "the number of postponements, adjournments, or extensions already granted". Extensions count, not only earlier postponements. Suppose an argument has never been postponed, but the respondent has already had two extensions of its briefing deadlines. Those two extensions fall within the factor when the respondent now asks to postpone the argument.

The fourth factor is "the prejudice to the other Parties". In the 9300 series a Party is the Department of Enforcement or a Respondent. Where two respondents' appeals are heard together, each is a Party in relation to the other. Suppose one respondent asks to postpone the argument and the co-respondent shows that the delay would prejudice it. That prejudice must be weighed, not only any prejudice to Enforcement.

Oral Argument Notice and Cancellation

When oral argument is held, FINRA Rule 9341(c) requires a notice of its date, time and location to be served on the Parties at least 21 days before the hearing. There are two ways to a shorter period. First, the Parties may agree in writing to waive the notice period. Suppose both Parties want the argument held sooner than 21 days' notice allows. They may agree in writing to waive the notice period.

Second, in extraordinary circumstances, the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee, or Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council may provide for a shorter notice period. Counsel's power here carries the same limit as under FINRA Rule 9322: Counsel may do so only with the consent of the Parties. Suppose extraordinary circumstances require an early argument and the respondent will not consent. The Subcommittee may still provide for a shorter notice period, but Counsel could not.

An argument that should not go ahead at all is dealt with differently. FINRA Rule 9341(a) allows the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee to cancel in writing a previously scheduled oral argument "for good cause shown due to abandonment or similar unreasonable availability". Suppose a respondent who requested argument has stopped responding to every communication in the appeal. The Subcommittee may cancel the scheduled argument in writing on that ground.

Brief Length and Briefing Periods

FINRA Rule 9347(a) limits a brief other than a reply brief to 25 double-spaced pages, and a reply brief to 12. Pages containing tables of contents or tables of authorities are excluded from the count. A longer brief needs advance leave. That leave may come from the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee, the National Adjudicatory Council, the Review Subcommittee, or Counsel to the National Adjudicatory Council. Suppose a respondent's opening brief will run to 32 pages of argument. The respondent must obtain leave before filing it, and Counsel is one of those who can give it.

Briefs are due on dates set in a scheduling order. Unless the order specifies otherwise, opening briefs are submitted not less than 21 days from the date of the scheduling order, and answering briefs 21 days after that. Reply briefs, when submitted, are filed not later than ten days after service of the answering brief. These are periods FINRA Rule 9322 allows the named bodies to extend or shorten. FINRA Rule 9347(b) repeats Counsel's limit: Counsel may not shorten a period previously established for filing briefs except with the consent of the Parties.

Moving to Add Evidence Once the Index Is Served

The transmission under FINRA Rule 9321 also starts a clock for the Parties. Under FINRA Rule 9346(b), a Party may apply to the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee, or the National Adjudicatory Council for leave to introduce additional evidence. It does so by a motion filed not later than 30 days after the Office of Hearing Officers transmits to the Council, and serves upon all Parties, the index to the record under FINRA Rule 9321. So the period runs from the Office's transmission and service of the index. It does not run from the filing of the notice of appeal, or from the last day the Office had for the transmission.

Suppose a respondent files a notice of appeal on Tuesday, 3 March 2026. The Office of Hearing Officers transmits the record and index to the Council, and serves the index on all Parties by electronic mail, on Monday, 23 March 2026, one day before its 21 days would have run out. A respondent who wants to introduce additional evidence must file its motion for leave not later than Wednesday, 22 April 2026, the thirtieth day after 23 March. Counting 30 days from the notice of appeal would give Thursday, 2 April. Counting from 24 March, the Office's last day, would give Thursday, 23 April. Neither is the period the rule sets.

A Party that has let the 30 days pass may still ask for more time, but it carries a burden. FINRA Rule 9346(b) provides that, by a motion filed in accordance with FINRA Rule 9146, a Party may request an extension of the period for filing a motion for leave to introduce additional evidence. The Party must demonstrate that there was good cause for failing to file the motion for leave during the period prescribed. Suppose a respondent decides to offer a document six weeks after the index was served on it. It must move for an extension of the period and show good cause for not having filed its motion for leave within the period.

The other side may answer the new evidence with evidence of its own. Under FINRA Rule 9346(c), a Party may file an opposition to a motion for leave to introduce new evidence, as provided in FINRA Rule 9146(d). It may also move for leave to introduce rebuttal evidence in response to the proposed new evidence. A Party moving to introduce rebuttal evidence describes each item of proposed rebuttal evidence, explains why it is material to the proceeding, and files and serves the motion. Suppose a respondent moves for leave to introduce a customer's affidavit, and the Department of Enforcement holds a document that contradicts it. Enforcement may oppose the respondent's motion, and it may also move for leave to introduce its document as rebuttal evidence.

What the Council May Do With New Evidence and New Issues

On a motion to introduce additional evidence, admitting the evidence is not the only course the rule provides. Under FINRA Rule 9346(d), after considering the motion and any opposition, the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee, or the National Adjudicatory Council may permit the evidence to be introduced into the record on review. Alternatively, the National Adjudicatory Council may remand the disciplinary proceeding for further proceedings consistent with its ruling or for further fact finding. Suppose the Council considers a respondent's motion and concludes that the proposed evidence calls for further fact finding. It may remand the proceeding for further fact finding rather than admit the evidence into the record on review.

A call for review is not confined to what its notice says. A notice of review under FINRA Rule 9312(c)(1) contains a brief statement of the findings, conclusions or sanctions for which a call for review was found necessary. FINRA Rule 9312(c)(2) provides that this statement shall not limit the scope of the National Adjudicatory Council's authority under FINRA Rule 9346 to review any issues raised in the record. Where the Council is to consider an issue that the notice of review did not set forth, the Parties must be given notice of that issue and an opportunity to submit briefs on it. Suppose a member of the Council calls a Hearing Panel decision for review, and the notice's statement deals only with the sanctions. The Council may still consider a finding of violation raised in the record, once the Parties have had notice of that issue and an opportunity to brief it.

A Party who leaves an issue out of its own notice of appeal takes a risk. Under FINRA Rule 9311(e), the National Adjudicatory Council may, in its discretion, deem waived any issue not raised in the notice of appeal or cross-appeal. Suppose a respondent's notice of appeal takes exception only to the sanctions, and its opening brief then challenges a finding of violation. The Council may, in its discretion, deem that challenge waived.

When the Only Appeal Is Withdrawn

FINRA Rule 9311(f) allows a Party to withdraw a notice of appeal or cross-appeal that it filed, at any time, by filing a written notice of withdrawal with the Office of Hearing Officers and serving it on the Parties. Upon the withdrawal of a notice of appeal, any outstanding cross-appeal is treated as an appeal unless it is withdrawn. Suppose a respondent appeals, the Department of Enforcement files a notice of cross-appeal, and the respondent later withdraws its appeal. Enforcement's cross-appeal is then treated as an appeal, unless Enforcement withdraws it too.

FINRA Rule 9312(d) deals with the case where the Council's review ends before a decision on the merits because all appealing Parties withdraw and no cross-appeal is left outstanding. For a default decision issued under FINRA Rule 9269, the General Counsel then has the right to call the decision for review in accordance with FINRA Rule 9312(a)(2). The 25-day period for that call begins on the day FINRA receives the last filed notice of withdrawal. Suppose a default decision is served on Monday, 2 February 2026, and the respondent files a notice of appeal within 25 days. No other Party files any notice. FINRA receives the respondent's notice of withdrawal of appeal on Monday, 13 April 2026. The 25 days that ran from service of the decision ended on 27 February. Even so, the General Counsel may still call the default decision for review on his or her own motion, because the 25-day period for that call begins on 13 April, the day FINRA received the withdrawal.

Who Sits, by What Means, and for How Long at Oral Argument

Under FINRA Rule 9341(d), the Parties make oral arguments before the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee. Unless otherwise agreed to by all of the Parties, all Panelists comprising the Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee participate in the oral argument. Suppose one member of a three-member Subcommittee cannot attend on the date set. Enforcement is content for the other two to hear the argument, but the respondent is not. The Parties have not all agreed, so all three Panelists must participate in the oral argument.

The same paragraph governs argument by video conference. The National Adjudicatory Council or Subcommittee may, in the exercise of reasonable discretion, order oral argument by video conference, in whole or in part, on either of two grounds. The first is a determination that proceeding in person may endanger the health or safety of the participants or would be impracticable. The second is a determination, on its own or on motion of a Party, that oral argument should occur by video conference for other reasons, unless any Party demonstrates that conducting oral argument by video conference would materially disadvantage that Party. Suppose Enforcement moves for argument by video conference to save travel costs. Nobody's health or safety is at risk, and attending in person is practicable. If the respondent demonstrates that arguing by video conference would materially disadvantage it, the argument may not be ordered by video conference for those reasons.

FINRA Rule 9341(e) limits each Party's oral argument to a total of 30 minutes, unless the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee orders otherwise for good cause shown. Suppose a respondent appealing findings on several separate charges wants an hour to argue. The Subcommittee may allow the longer time if good cause is shown. Without such an order, the respondent has 30 minutes in total.

Asking for Oral Argument

Oral argument must be requested in writing, and FINRA Rule 9341(a) says when. The request is made either in the Party's notice of appeal or cross-appeal, or within 15 days after service of the National Adjudicatory Council's notice of review. FINRA Rule 9311(c)(4) accordingly requires a notice of appeal to contain a statement on whether oral argument before the Council is requested. Suppose no Party appeals a Hearing Panel decision, and a member of the Council calls it for review. A respondent that wants oral argument has filed no notice of appeal in which to ask for it. It must request argument in writing within 15 days after service of the notice of review.

Subject to the limitations of FINRA Rules 9342 and 9344, oral argument shall be granted if timely requested. The right to oral argument is unaffected by a Party's waiver of, or failure to request, a hearing under the Rule 9200 Series. Suppose a respondent waived a hearing before the Hearing Panel and then, in its notice of appeal, requests oral argument. Its earlier waiver does not affect its right to argument. Subject to the limitations of FINRA Rules 9342 and 9344, the argument shall be granted.

Examination Relevance and Key Takeaways

FINRA Rule 9320 is tested on the Series 24 General Securities Principal examination as the subsection header for the record transmission and appellate scheduling framework — understanding its structural role is prerequisite to navigating the relationship between FINRA Rule 9321's twenty-one-day record transmission obligation and FINRA Rule 9322's appellate scheduling flexibility provisions.

The key points to retain are these: FINRA Rule 9320 is the subsection header for the two-rule record transmission and scheduling flexibility cluster within the 9300 series — it has no independent operative text but organizes FINRA Rules 9321 and 9322; FINRA Rule 9321 requires OHO to assemble, index, transmit, and certify the complete official record to the NAC within twenty-one days of a FINRA Rule 9311 appeal or FINRA Rule 9312 call for review filing, or at such later time as the NAC may designate; FINRA Rule 9322 grants the NAC, its subcommittees, and Counsel to the NAC scheduling flexibility through the same good cause standard as FINRA Rule 9222's OHO counterpart — with a six-factor analysis for postponement and adjournment requests that adds the prejudice to the other parties — with the important protection that Counsel to the NAC may shorten filing periods or postpone hearings only with the consent of all parties; and the rule was adopted as part of the original 1997 Code of Procedure and has been maintained as the subsection header through all subsequent amendments.