Armstrong v. Cftc

12 F.3d 401 (3rd Cir. 1993)


In 1983 P began accepting and fulfilling paid subscriptions for a commodity market forecast newsletter. P formed three corporations for the provision of commodity services. These corporations provided consulting services, seminar programs, written reports, telephone and telex newsline messages, and account management services. D filed an administrative complaint charging P and the companies with failure to register as commodity trading advisors, to deliver required disclosure documents to clients, and to maintain proper records. The ALJ issued a finding that P and all three corporations liable on all counts charged in both dockets and proposing sanctions. After a hearing, the ALJ reaffirmed the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in his Initial Decision and imposed the tentative sanctions.  P and the corporations appealed, and D reversed the ALJ's finding that P was individually liable for the violations alleged in the first complaint. The Commission affirmed the findings under the second complaint, including P's liability for PEC's and EPC's violations. P appealed. P complains that D did not meet the requirements of the APA because it did not provide 'an adequate statement of . . . findings and conclusions, and the reasons or basis therefor, on all the material issues of fact, law, or discretion presented on the record.'