March 20, 2018 - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgement of the district court is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this court's opinion.
October 27, 2015 - The parties filed a stipulation withdrawing the appeal with prejudice as to two certain appellees. The court granted the stipulation. The appeal proceeds with respect to the remaining appellees.

September 29, 2015 - A notice of appeal was filed.

August 26, 2015 - The court granted defendants' motions to dismiss and closed the case.

January 23, 2015 - A motion to dismiss was filed.

December 18, 2014 - The court ordered the transfer of this case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

November 24, 2014 - A second amended complaint was filed.

November 3, 2014 - A motion to dismiss the amended consolidated complaint was filed.

September 2, 2014 - An amended consolidated complaint.

April 18, 2014 - An institutional investor filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of public investors who purchased and/or sold shares of stock in the United States between April 18, 2009 and April 18, 2014 on a registered public stock exchange or a United States-based alternate trading venue and were injured as a result of the misconduct.

The complaint claims that the defendants engaged in a scheme and wrongful course of business whereby the Exchange Defendants, together with a defendant class of the brokerage firms entrusted to fairly and honestly transact the purchase and sale of securities on behalf of their clients and a defendant class of sophisticated high frequency trading firms engaged in conduct that was designed to and did manipulate the U.S. securities markets and the trading of equities on those markets, diverting billions of dollars annually from buyers and sellers of securities to the defendants, in violation of §§6, 10(b) and 20A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The plaintiff further alleges that contrary to the duties imposed upon them by law, SEC rules and their own regulations, the defendants participated in a scheme and wrongful course of business whereby certain market participants were provided with material, non-public information so that those market participants could use the informational advantage obtained to manipulate the U.S. securities market to the detriment of public investors. Notwithstanding their legal obligations and duties to provide for orderly and honest trading and to match the bids and orders placed on behalf of investors at the best available price, the Exchange Defendants and those defendants that controlled alternate trading venues demanded and received substantial kickback payments in exchange for providing the HFT Defendants access to material trading data via preferred access to exchange floors and/or through proprietary trading products. Likewise, in exchange for kickback payments, the Brokerage Firm Defendants provided access to their customers’ bids and offers, and directed their customers’ trades to stock exchanges and alternate trading venues that the Brokerage Firm Defendants knew had been rigged and were subject to informational asymmetries as a result of defendants’ scheme and wrongful course of business. Defendants’ predatory practices included the Brokerage Firm Defendants selling “special access” to material data, including orders made by the investing public so that the HFT Defendants could then trade against them using the informational asymmetries and other market manipulation. Defendants’ misconduct rigged the market and manipulated the prices at which shares were traded April 18, 2009 and April 18, 2014, causing substantial damage to public investors as a result thereof.