very intelligent post.
the sec is limited in what it can and can't do. it can remand the case back to the dtcc, and it did. but i think you're missing some of the other aspects of the sec ruling.
for example, the sec sanctions the dtcc for not following their own procedures. they didn't notify ipwg before the stock was chilled. they did not offer ipwg a remedy. and they refused to hear ipwg's challenge to the chill. they also noted that ipwg did nothing wrong.
as far as will there be a lawsuit to follow, try calling the ceo. i'm sure he will tell you that there will be one. what case do they have? the dtcc did not follow it's own procedures, and placed a chill with lack of justification. if you read the sec ruling, they specified that the chill was unjustified.
the sec remanded the case back to the dtcc, but that does not mean ipwg has to take that direction. the mere fact that it was remanded, indicates the dtcc did something wrong. it is questionable what powers the sec has over the dtcc. but it is not questionable what powers a court has over them.
what do you need for a successful lawsuit? you need to be able to prove that the other party did something wrong/illegal + you need to show you suffered damages as a result. ipwg can now easily show the dtcc broke its own rules, and there is no question that ipwg, and its shareholders were damaged.
it has been rumored that several law firms have offered to proceed with a lawsuit on a contingency basis. this in itself is proof they have a case. no law firm would take on this situation on a contingency basis, unless they were fairly certain they had a very good case.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
