CFTC v. Donald R. Wilson and DRW Investments, LLC (banging the close, 2013)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (cftc-donald-r-wilson-and-his-company-banging-the-close-2013) by email

In November 2013 the CFTC filed a complaint in the Southern District of New York charging Donald Wilson and DRW Investments, LLC with manipulating the IDEX USD three-month interest rate swap futures contract by banging the close in 2011. After a bench trial the court ruled on November 30, 2018 that the CFTC had not proved manipulation or attempted manipulation and entered judgment for the defendants, and the CFTC later said it would not appeal.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

$20m

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

the Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced this matter on November 7, 2013 as release 6766-13. The respondents named are Donald R. Wilson and DRW Investments, LLC (1 individual, 1 entity). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.

This library tags the matter as banging the close, price manipulation and settlement price manipulation, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The conduct is recorded against equities and futures, with Nasdaq, OTC identified in the release.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

The case went to a bench trial in December 2016. In an opinion dated November 30, 2018, the district judge held that the CFTC had not met its burden of proving manipulation, attempted manipulation or the related control-person claims, finding that the defendants' bids were made with a genuine wish to trade and had a legitimate economic rationale, and directed the clerk to enter judgment. On February 27, 2019 a CFTC spokesperson stated that the agency would not appeal. No penalty or other sanction was imposed, so the allegations in the complaint, including the roughly $20 million gain it described, were not established.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 3 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Banging the close — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Settlement price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2013-11-06 CFTC release published
2. 2018-11-30 District court opinion finds the CFTC did not prove manipulation; judgment for defendants
3. 2019-02-27 CFTC spokesperson statement: no appeal of the district court decision

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• CFTC release
• Court opinion, 30 November 2018 (copy on CCH)
• CFTC statement on decision not to appeal

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.