{"id":1489,"date":"2014-07-28T16:24:31","date_gmt":"2014-07-28T16:24:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.stockbrokerfraudblog.com\/2014\/07\/citigroups_lavaflow_to_pay_5m"},"modified":"2022-03-11T13:23:59","modified_gmt":"2022-03-11T19:23:59","slug":"citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/","title":{"rendered":"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS"},"content":{"rendered":"

\t\t\t\tLavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C)<\/a> business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not protect subscribers’ confidential trading data in its alternative trading system. LavaFlow consented to the SEC order without denying or admitting to the allegations. <\/p>\n

Per the order, which institutes a settled administrative proceeding, LavaFlow, which runs an electronic communications network ATS, let an affiliate that runs a smart order router application to access and utilize confidential data related to non-displayed orders belonging to subscribers. The order router was not within ECN’s operations and LavaFlow lacked the proper procedures and safeguards to protect this confidential information. <\/p>\n

Even though LavaFlow only let the affiliate use the confidential data for ECN subscribers that were also order router customers, the firm did not get subscribers’ consented for their confidential data to be used like this. LavaFlow also failed to disclose this use to the SEC.<\/p>\n

Continue Reading \u203a<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

LavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C) business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not protect subscribers’ confidential trading data in its alternative trading system. LavaFlow consented to the SEC order without denying or admitting to the allegations. Per the order, which institutes a settled […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3820,3752],"tags":[3440,3436],"class_list":["post-1489","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-citigroup","category-financial-firms","tag-alternative-trading-system","tag-ats"],"yoast_head":"\nCitigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 28, 2014<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"LavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C) business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not — July 28, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 28, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"LavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C) business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not — July 28, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 28, 2014","description":"LavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C) business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not — July 28, 2014","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 28, 2014","twitter_description":"LavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C) business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not — July 28, 2014","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/"},"author":{"name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"headline":"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS","datePublished":"2014-07-28T16:24:31+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-11T19:23:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/"},"wordCount":678,"keywords":["alternative trading system","ATS"],"articleSection":["Citigroup","Financial Firms"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/","name":"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 28, 2014","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2014-07-28T16:24:31+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-11T19:23:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"description":"LavaFlow Inc., a Citigroup (C) business unit, has consented to pay $ 5million to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges that it did not — July 28, 2014","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/citigroups-lavaflow-to-pay-5m\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Citigroup\u2019s LavaFlow to Pay $5M to SEC For Not Protecting Subscriber Data in ATS"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/","name":"Investor Lawyers Blog","description":"Published By Investment Fraud Attorneys \u2014 Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431","name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pedX9K-o1","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1489","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1489"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1489\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24156,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1489\/revisions\/24156"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1489"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1489"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}