Whether the evidence at trial so dramatically changed the type, number, and scope of the specifically alleged trades that the defendant was denied his rights under the Grand Jury Clause

question presented is whether the evidence at trial so dramatically changed the type, number, and scope of the specifically alleged trades that Mr. Korchevsky was denied his rights under the Grand Jury Clause. 2. In United States v. O'Hagan, 541 U.S. 642 (1997), this Court determined that there is no general duty under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), for a market participant to forgo trading based on material, nonpublic information that he or she might possess, regardless of how it was obtained. O’Hagan, 541 U.S. at 661. The question presented is whether conduct can constitute securities violations under Section 10(b) even when a defendant has no relationship with any of the alleged victims beyond that of a counterparty to a stock transaction. u PARTIES INVOLVED The parties involved in this case are Respondent the United States of America, which was the appellee below, Respondent Vladislav Khalupsky, who was an appellant below, and Petitioner Vitaly Korchevsky, who was an appellant below.