Keywords: Oklahoma Jury Instruction, 4.4.1 Rule 10(b) — 5(a), Device, Scheme, Artifice to Defraud, Insider Trading Oklahoma Jury Instruction — 4.4.1 Rule 10(b— - 5(a) Device, Scheme, or Artifice to Defraud Insider Trading is a legal guideline used in Oklahoma courts to educate the jury about the various forms and elements of fraud related to insider trading. This instruction helps the jury understand the specific actions, intentions, and deceitful methods involved in illegal insider trading activities. Insider trading refers to the buying or selling of securities based on confidential information not yet made available to the public. It is considered illegal as it gives unfair advantages to those who possess such information, undermining the integrity and fairness of financial markets. The instruction, under the Oklahoma 4.4.1 Rule 10(b) — 5(a), covers different types of devices, schemes, or artifices used by individuals engaged in insider trading to defraud others in pursuit of personal gains. These can include: 1. Tipping: This involves the unauthorized disclosure of material non-public information to another person, providing them with an advantage in trading securities. The tipper and the tipped can both be held liable under insider trading laws. 2. Trading on confidential information: This refers to the buying or selling of securities by an individual who possesses undisclosed material information, making it illegal for them to trade on such information to gain personal profits. 3. Misappropriation of information: This type of insider trading occurs when a person misuses confidential information entrusted to them for personal trading purposes. It typically involves individuals in a fiduciary or confidential relationship misappropriating information for personal gain. 4. Front-running: This form of insider trading involves a person trading securities for personal gain before executing orders for their clients or in anticipation of big market-moving trades. Front-runners exploit their access to pending orders and execute their trades ahead of others to benefit from price movements. These are just a few examples of the various ways individuals may engage in insider trading to defraud others. Each case is evaluated on its own merit, and the jury is responsible for determining whether the accused individual's actions constitute a device, scheme, or artifice to defraud. It is important to note that legal definitions and interpretations may vary in different jurisdictions, and this description focuses on the Oklahoma 4.4.1 Rule 10(b) — 5(a) instruction specifically.