PETITIONERS’ EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY RULE (Brief)

ISDA/SIFMA filed an Emergency Motion to Stay Rule, requesting that the Court of Appeals stay the effective date of the Position Limits for Futures and Swaps; Final Rule and Interim Final Rule, including all its new provisions codified in 17 C.F.R. § 151 and its revisions to 17 C.F.R. § 1, while this litigation is pending. See attached for the full pleading.

Effective date: March 9, 2012.

The pleading in promulgating its rule "the Commission deemed itself liberated from this most basic constraint on regulatory decision making, it adopted onerous limits without a reasoned basis"; that it "failed to satisfy its independent statutory obligation to conduct a meaningful cost-benefit analysis"; that "[t]he sparse cost-benefit findings the Commission did offer were tentative, superficial, and merely begged questions that the Commission was required to answer"; and that the analysis consisted of "empty 'analysis'-which posed, rather than answered," the fundamental question. The motion relies in part of on a declaration submitted by economist Craig Pirrong.

Cross References: Dodd-Frank Section 737; 5 U.S.C. § 705; 76 F.R. 71626; Int'l Swaps Derivatives Ass 'n v. CFTC, No.

1:11~cv~2146 (D.D.C.); Int'l Swaps &Derivatives Ass'n v. CFTC, No. 11~1469 (D.C. Cir.).