Dear all:
Following up on our productive discussion earlier this week, we’d like to offer a suggestion to modify the “attestation” provisions (II.A.6.c; II.B.7.d; and II.C.6.c) to require a statement by the requestor specifying his/her authority
for making the request, or basis for agency if he or she is not the rights holder. For example: “Where the signatory is not the rights holder, he/she must attest that he/she is an authorized representative of the rights holder, capable and qualified to evaluate
and address the matters involved in this request, and having the authority to make the representations and claims on behalf of the rights holder in the request.”
We could even spell out the statement for the signatory to make in conjunction with each request : “I attest that I am the rights holder / authorized representative of the rights holder, capable and qualified to evaluate and address the
matters involved in this request, and have the authority to make the representations and claims in this request.”
These statements of authority and agency are to be made in good faith, under the penalty of perjury – just like representations forming the basis for the request and the requestor’s promise to use the data disclosed only for limited enumerated
purposes – and the falsity of these statements would be redressable by the method(s) we agree on.
We believe this approach fairly balances the considerations expressed by various WG members and look forward to your thoughts.
Best,
Val
Valeriya Sherman | Attorney at Law
202-973-2611 phone
202-263-4326 fax
www.sgrlaw.com
vsherman@sgrlaw.com
1055 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.
Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20007
Ms. Sherman's practice is limited to matters before federal courts and before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
She is not admitted in the District of Columbia.
Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP