Table of Contents
SERIES 24 | FINANCIAL REGULATION COURSES
FINRA Rule 9341 governs the oral argument process in National Adjudicatory Council appellate proceedings — the formal presentation session in which parties appear before the Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee appointed under FINRA Rule 9331 to present their appellate arguments, answer the Subcommittee's questions about the record and legal standards, and supplement the written briefing that FINRA Rule 9347 governs.
The rule establishes the two pathways through which oral argument may be ordered — party request and Subcommittee initiative — the timing and manner for requesting oral argument, the advance notice requirement, the applicable briefing schedule, the email service provisions for oral argument notices, the video conference authority permanently codified by the August 2023 amendment, and the transcript correction process that applies when oral argument proceedings are recorded.
Together these provisions define the complete framework for FINRA's appellate oral argument — an important but non-mandatory aspect of the appellate process that supplements written briefing in cases where the Subcommittee determines that live presentation would meaningfully advance the analytical quality of its recommended decision.
FINRA Rule 9341 sits within the 9340 Proceedings subsection of the 9300 Review of Disciplinary Proceeding series. It was adopted by SR-NASD-97-28 effective August 7, 1997, amended multiple times through SR-FINRA-2008-021 effective December 15, 2008, amended by SR-FINRA-2022-009 effective August 22, 2022 adding the email service provisions, and most recently amended by SR-FINRA-2023-008 effective August 23, 2023 as announced in Regulatory Notice 23-13 permanently codifying the video conference authority for NAC oral arguments.
FINRA Rule 9341(a) establishes the party request pathway for oral argument. Oral argument shall be requested in writing either in the party's notice of appeal or cross-appeal filed under FINRA Rule 9311, or within fifteen days after service of the NAC's notice of review under FINRA Rule 9312.
These are the two specific timing windows within which a party must make their oral argument request — missing both windows means the party has not preserved the right to request oral argument.
The notice of appeal timing is the primary window for respondents and the Department of Enforcement who are filing appeals of Hearing Panel decisions. By including the oral argument request in the notice of appeal alongside the substantive grounds of appeal, the appealing party makes clear from the outset whether they want oral argument. The FINRA Rule 9311(c)(5) requirement that the notice of appeal state whether the party requests oral argument before a Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee directly implements this FINRA Rule 9341(a) request window.
The fifteen-day-after-NAC-review-notice window accommodates the FINRA Rule 9312 scenario where the NAC calls a case for review without any party having filed an appeal. Since no notice of appeal or cross-appeal is filed in that scenario, a party who wants oral argument in a NAC-initiated review must request it within fifteen days after receiving the NAC's notice of review.
Alongside the party request pathway, FINRA Rule 9341 also grants the Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee authority to order oral argument on its own initiative — independent of any party request. This own-initiative authority enables the Subcommittee to conduct oral argument in cases it determines would benefit from live presentation even when no party has requested it. A Subcommittee reviewing a complex appeal involving novel legal theories, conflicting factual accounts, or significant policy implications may determine that questioning the parties directly would materially advance the quality of the recommended decision — and may order oral argument on its own initiative to obtain that benefit.
This own-initiative authority is the appellate counterpart to FINRA Rule 9146(e)'s authority for Adjudicators to allow oral argument on motions — both provisions recognize that the adjudicative body's assessment of when live argument would be helpful may differ from the parties' own assessment.
FINRA Rule 9341(b) establishes the logistics framework for oral argument. The Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee shall provide the parties with advance notice of the date, time, and location of oral argument — with Counsel to the NAC typically scheduling the logistics under FINRA Rule 9313(a)(4)'s administrative authority to establish the date, time, and location of oral argument and provide for notice.
The briefing schedule connected to oral argument is established pursuant to FINRA Rule 9347 — the filing of papers in NAC proceedings rule. The briefing typically follows an opening brief by the appellant, an answering brief by the appellee, and a reply brief by the appellant if the Subcommittee permits one under the FINRA Rule 9146(h) no-right-to-reply default applicable through FINRA Rule 9110(a)'s general applicability principle. The briefing schedule is set by Counsel to the NAC under FINRA Rule 9313(a)(2)'s briefing schedule authority, subject to the party consent requirement for schedule compression.
FINRA Rule 9341's most significant recent amendment — SR-FINRA-2023-008 effective August 23, 2023, announced in Regulatory Notice 23-13 — permanently codified the authority to conduct NAC oral arguments by video conference. This amendment is the appellate counterpart to the same rule change's parallel amendment to FINRA Rule 9261 governing OHO evidentiary hearings — both amendments permanently adopted the video conference flexibility that FINRA first implemented as a temporary measure during the COVID-19 pandemic.
As Regulatory Notice 23-13 explained, the authority under FINRA Rule 9341 for NAC oral arguments belongs to the NAC or relevant Subcommittee rather than the Chief Hearing Officer — the institutional difference reflecting the different organizational structure of the appellate proceedings. The NAC or Subcommittee may order oral argument by video conference either on its own initiative or based on a motion of a party. In deciding whether to order video conference oral argument, the NAC or Subcommittee may consider factors including a hearing participant's individual health concerns, access to video conference technology, whether a party has delayed or refused to appear in person, and whether proceeding by video conference would materially disadvantage any party.
The practical significance of the video conference authority for NAC appellate proceedings is considerable. NAC appellate oral argument has traditionally been conducted in Washington, D.C., requiring parties' counsel to travel to FINRA's headquarters. Video conference oral argument eliminates this travel requirement, reducing costs and scheduling barriers that have sometimes led parties to waive oral argument rather than incur the expense and disruption of travel. The permanent codification of video conference authority ensures this flexibility is available for all future appellate proceedings regardless of public health conditions.
FINRA Rule 9341(c) — addressing the transcript of oral argument proceedings — establishes a correction mechanism parallel to FINRA Rule 9265's correction process for OHO hearing transcripts. Prior to the filing of post-hearing briefs or within such earlier time as reasonably ordered by the Subcommittee, a party or witness may seek to correct their transcript. A proposed correction shall be submitted by affidavit to the Subcommittee, which may order the correction as requested or sua sponte upon notice to all parties.
The same principles that govern FINRA Rule 9265's transcript correction process apply here — corrections must be made before post-hearing briefing to prevent disruption to parties who have already organized their arguments around the existing transcript, the affidavit requirement ensures sworn accountability for correction requests, and the Subcommittee retains sua sponte authority to address obvious transcription errors.
The August 22, 2022 amendment through SR-FINRA-2022-009 added email service authority for the notice of oral argument. OHO may serve the notice of oral argument by email, with service deemed complete upon sending of the notice. This email service provision aligns oral argument notice service with the broader electronic service modernization that SR-FINRA-2022-009 applied across the Code of Procedure — replacing or supplementing traditional mail service with electronic service for administrative notices whose timely receipt is important but whose legal consequences do not require the heightened reliability of certified mail or personal service.
In practice, FINRA appellate oral argument sessions are substantially different from federal appellate court oral arguments. Federal circuit court oral arguments are typically thirty minutes per side in a highly formal setting. FINRA appellate oral arguments are conducted in a smaller, less formal setting where the Subcommittee members drive the session through questions rather than the parties driving it through prepared presentations.
The Subcommittee members — who have already reviewed the briefs and at least portions of the record — use oral argument to probe the specific aspects of the appeal they find most significant, test the parties' factual and legal claims through hypotheticals, and assess the parties' ability to defend their positions under sustained questioning.
This question-driven format means that effective preparation for FINRA NAC oral argument requires thorough familiarity with the complete record — not just the portions highlighted in the briefs — and the ability to respond precisely to questions about specific transcript pages, specific exhibit contents, and specific aspects of the legal standards at issue. The Subcommittee's questions often signal the issues on which the recommended decision will turn.
FINRA Rule 9341 connects to FINRA Rule 9313(a)(4) — which grants Counsel to the NAC administrative authority to schedule and provide notice of oral argument. It connects to FINRA Rule 9331 — whose Subcommittee appointment creates the body that conducts oral argument. It connects to FINRA Rule 9342 — which governs the default consequences for failure to appear at scheduled oral argument. It connects to FINRA Rule 9343 — which governs disposition without oral argument when the Subcommittee determines written briefing is sufficient. It connects to FINRA Rule 9345 — whose recommended decision is the output of the Subcommittee's deliberations following oral argument and record review. It connects to FINRA Rule 9346 — which governs the evidence framework within which the Subcommittee considers the record alongside oral argument. And it connects to FINRA Rule 9347 — whose briefing schedule governs the written submissions that precede and complement oral argument.
FINRA Rule 9341 is tested on the Series 24 General Securities Principal examination as the NAC appellate oral argument rule — covering the request mechanism, the Subcommittee's own-initiative authority, the video conference provisions, and the connection to the broader appellate briefing framework.
The key points to retain are these: FINRA Rule 9341 governs oral argument in NAC appellate proceedings — oral argument is not an absolute right but is available through two pathways: written party request and Subcommittee own-initiative; party requests must be made in the notice of appeal or cross-appeal under FINRA Rule 9311 or within fifteen days after service of the NAC's notice of review under FINRA Rule 9312; the Subcommittee or Extended Proceeding Committee may also order oral argument on its own initiative when it determines live argument would advance the analytical quality of its recommended decision; advance notice of oral argument date, time, and location is provided by Counsel to the NAC under FINRA Rule 9313(a)(4); the briefing schedule preceding oral argument is governed by FINRA Rule 9347; the NAC or relevant Subcommittee may order oral argument conducted by video conference either on its own initiative or on party motion — this authority was permanently codified by SR-FINRA-2023-008 effective August 23, 2023 as announced in Regulatory Notice 23-13; parties and witnesses may seek transcript corrections by affidavit prior to post-hearing brief filing with Subcommittee authority to correct sua sponte; oral argument notices may be served by email with service complete upon sending following SR-FINRA-2022-009 effective August 22, 2022; and the rule was last amended August 23, 2023 through SR-FINRA-2023-008.
