Dear Commissioners: When clients ask me about an investment, they want to know a simple thing first: what do I own? With tokenized stocks, that answer may depend on details that are not obvious from the product's name or trading screen—who issued the token, whether it represents an actual share, what rights come with it, and whether the company whose stock it references took part. That is why the issuer-notification and opt-out process matters to investors, not just to companies and platforms. If a company has 30 days to object, investors should be able to know whether notice was actually delivered, whether the company responded, and what the response means for the product. Otherwise, a customer may mistake a third-party token for something the issuer has authorized or may be left unsure about the rights attached to it. The Commission can make this process more workable by requiring plain-language disclosures at the point of sale and a reliable way to check an offering's status. Those disclosures should identify the token's issuer and relationship to the underlying shares, explain the rights and limitations, and state whether the company received notice and objected. The process for sending and recording notices should also be consistent, so that an issuer's silence is not misunderstood when delivery or receipt is uncertain. People are more willing to consider unfamiliar financial products when the basic facts are easy to find and compare. Clear procedures and straightforward explanations would help investors make informed choices without requiring them to untangle the mechanics themselves. I encourage the Commission to provide that clarity as tokenized securities enter the market.