Hi Julie, all,
Just a few minor comments from me:
- for Procedural Issues Q7 and 9, we were going to add (as is in the preceding section Q3) something like “…and leaving aside the result of the proceeding”
- for Practical Issues Q6, it would be useful to list out the different timelines for a response and the various appeals options, rather than a reference to the Rules
- those are: 14 days for a response (including a right to request 7 days extension), seeking de novo review (from default) for up to six months plus
an option to request an additional 6 months, and filing an appeal for up to 14 days after default or a determination
Thanks and have a great weekend!
Brian
From: gnso-rpm-wg [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 1:22 AM
To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR REVIEW: Revised Questions to URS Practitioners - Please Comment by Tuesday, 24 April
Please see the attached revised document “URS Practitioner Background Experience and Perspective” based on the comments and suggestions received during the RPM PDP WG meeting today, 18 April. Please review
the document per the following action item highlighted below. The suggested edits are indicated by redline and strikethrough in the attached document.
Please note:
Thank you for your time and review!
Best Regards,
Mary, Julie, Berry, and Ariel
|
Powering change: Women in innovation and creativity World Intellectual Property Day 2018 April 26 wipo.int/ipday #worldipday |
World Intellectual Property Organization Disclaimer: This electronic message may contain privileged, confidential and copyright protected
information. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail and all its attachments. Please ensure all e-mail attachments are scanned for viruses prior to opening or using.