ICAN Challenges FINRA Delays Again: Troubling Shadow Trading Ban Uncovered

After FINRA delay win, new cases raise concerns.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 8th, 2026

LOS ANGELES, CA — The Investor Choice Advocates Network (ICAN) continues to challenge a pattern of prolonged regulatory delays at the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) after uncovering similar treatment across multiple public companies following an earlier successful action.

ICAN previously represented shareholders of Entrex Carbon Market, Inc., where FINRA failed to act for approximately 15 months on routine corporate action filings, including a name change and ticker symbol change. Only after ICAN filed an application with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) challenging that delay did FINRA approve the filings.

“That case demonstrated something very simple,” said ICAN President Nick Morgan. “FINRA had the ability to act—it just didn’t, until its delay was challenged.”

A Pattern Emerges

After the Entrex matter became public, other companies experiencing similar delays contacted ICAN, including DNA Brands, Inc. and ZA Group, Inc. Like Entrex, these companies submitted routine corporate action materials and then waited for months without receiving an approval or suggestion that inaccurate information had been provided.

In both instances, FINRA declined to move forward on routine, accurate corporate actions such as name changes and reverse splits.

FINRA’s Improper Rationale Emerges

When FINRA ultimately denied the DNAX and ZAAG filings, it disclosed that the decisions were based not on any lack of disclosure or inaccuracy in the corporate actions themselves, but on the involvement of a specific third-party investor associated with the companies. The investor was not an officer, director, or Section 16 shareholder of the companies. FINRA cited Rule 6490, which governs how companies notify the market about routine corporate actions, as the basis for its decision.

“FINRA’s refusal to act effectively punishes shareholders in the absence of any contention by FINRA that the companies have misrepresented or omitted any information,” Morgan said. “FINRA’s use of Rule 6490 in such a manner exceeds the authority granted to FINRA by the SEC.”

What the Rule Was Meant to Do — and How It’s Being Used Instead

The SEC approved Rule 6490 to serve a narrow, practical purpose: to make sure companies provide complete and accurate information to the market when they announce routine corporate actions. It was not intended to give FINRA broad discretion to block those actions for unrelated reasons.

In the case of DNAX and ZAAG, FINRA does not dispute that the companies submitted all required information accurately and on time. Instead, FINRA used the rule to stop approval of the corporate actions because of the involvement of a third-party investor—turning a basic notification process into a barrier that froze company decisions indefinitely.

“FINRA’s refusal to process these actions creates the very market confusion and 'information gap' that Rule 6490 was designed to prevent,” said Morgan. “When a Secretary of State approves a legal name change or a reverse split, that becomes the legal reality for the issuer. By blocking the administrative processing of these changes, FINRA ensures that the information available to investors—such as the issuer’s legal name or share count—is factually incorrect and inconsistent with state-level corporate records. Far from 'protecting investors,' FINRA is effectively mandating the continued dissemination of misleading information in the public marketplace.”

A “Shadow Trading Ban”

ICAN argues that FINRA’s delay amounts to a “shadow trading ban”: FINRA’s refusal to process accurately disclosed name changes and reverse splits does not simply 'pause' the corporate actions; it creates a structural distortion in the public marketplace. While the Issuer’s state-level records reflect one name and one share structure, FINRA forces the public tape to reflect a stale name and share count. This ensures that every public-facing data point—from total shares outstanding to market capitalization—is factually incorrect. Far from 'protecting' the market, FINRA is effectively polluting it with misleading data and creating a “shadow trading ban.”

Why It Matters

FINRA’s delays had tangible consequences for the affected companies, including stalled corporate actions, investor confusion, and increased costs. ICAN’s cases raise broader questions about accountability when a powerful self-regulatory organization can impose real-world harm through inaction rather than transparent decision-making.

“Markets rely on clear rules and timely decisions,” Morgan said. “When silence and inaction become a regulatory cudgel, confidence and fairness suffer.”

View Court Filings Here

For more information about ICAN's work, visit www.icanlaw.org or contact: info@icanlaw.org

About ICAN: The Investor Choice Advocates Network (ICAN) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to breaking down barriers to entry to capital markets and pushing back against regulatory overreach. ICAN advocates for fair and transparent regulatory practices, ensuring all individuals have equal access to investment opportunities and due process in the financial markets.

Contact Information: Investor Choice Advocates Network (ICAN) Email: info@icanlaw.org Website: www.icanlaw.org