Hi Lars, You asked me to explain in more detail the reason that the Appeal of Formal Objection needs a Quick Look (as we have created for the underlying Objection itself). It’s a fair question and calls up recommendations of the SubPro and the goal that the Appeals be the truly limited mechanism that the SubPro hoped to create. _From the SubPro Final Report:_ “Implementation Guidance 32.7: All challenges and appeals except for the conflict of interest appeals should be reviewed under the ‘clearly erroneous’ standard. Conflict of interest should be reviewed under a ‘de novo’ standard.” *“Recommendation 32.10:* *The limited challenge/appeal process must be designed in a manner that does not cause excessive, unnecessary costs or delays… “ * “Implementation Guidance 32.12:The limited challenge/appeal mechanism should include a ‘quick look’ step at the beginning of the process to identify and eliminate frivolous challenges/appeals.” *Rationale for Recommendation 32.10 and Implementation Guidance 21.11-32.13: “… Specifically, a ‘quick look’ mechanism is proposed to avoid unnecessary costs and delays associated with frivolous challenges/appeals.”* _How do we prevent abuse of the Objection process (the underlying proceeding)?_ While we are still working out the final details, the IRT has done a good job of preventing misuse of the initial Objection filing by created a “Quick Look” mechanism. According to our IRT docs: /“The “quick look mechanism” is designed to identify and eliminate objections that are manifestly unfounded and/or an abuse of the right to object in the following cases:/ /● The objection is not filed on one of the accepted objection grounds; and/or/ /● The party filing the objection does not have standing; and/or/ /● Insufficient or no evidence is provided to support the objection; and/or/ /● The objection is far-fetched, clearly invented, manifestly contrary to common sense, or so ambiguous that it is objectively impossible for the DRSP to make sense of it; and/or/ /● The objection spreads, incites, promotes, or justifies hatred based on intolerance towards a certain group; and/or/ /● Other facts that may clearly show that the objection is manifestly unfounded and/or an abuse to the right to object.” Proposed AGB Language_Quick Look Mechanism_v02_2024-02-29, among other materials./ /Further, the IRT found: “An objection may be considered manifestly unfounded and/or an abuse to the right to object in the following cases:/ /● Multiple objections on the same ground are filed by the same or related parties against the same applicant in a manner that constitutes harassment of the applicant…”/ *Thus, the IRT created the Quick Look procedure:*//*“The quick look is the Panel’s first task, after its appointment by the DRSP and is a review on the merits of the objection. The dismissal of an objection that is manifestly ill-founded and/or anabuse of the right to object would be an Expert Determination, rendered in accordance with [Article x] of the New gTLD Dispute Resolution Procedure.” * *_Similarly for the Appeals Process, a Quick Look at each Appeal will prevent abuse of the Limited Appeals proceeding_* Like the Objections process itself, the Appeals of a Formal Objection cannot be filed by anyone or for any reason. It is not a filing by right, but by reason. Just as with the Objections process, the Quick Look for the Limited Appeals process will ensure the rapid dismissal of an appeal that is manifestly ill-founded and/or an abuse of the right to appeal. You asked what might be rejected on a Quick Look of an Appeals filing, and such filings would include: - A conflict of interest by the original Objection Panelist alleged, but filled with inaccurate allegations of where the Panelist works or worked – thus the challenge is made with data that is incorrect or obsolete. - The Appellant challenges part of the underlying Objection, but with evidence and arguments that do not come close meeting the very high “clearly erroneous” standard required for an Appeal. - The Party filing the appeal was not a party to the underlying proceeding. - The Appellant appeals each and every Objection it lost because it does not like the Objection process or does not like to lose. This would be an abuse of process. - The Appeal is filed for frivolous reasons hoping the party that won the Objection (such as a Community or Trademark Owner) will not have the money to continue to the Appeal. A Quick Look is /even more important for a Limited Appeals process than the underlying Objection/ because we set such a *high standard for the Appeals and made it limited. The best way to ensure the Appeal is efficient, not frivolous, not created for delay, and not intended to harass one or more parties filing the Objections is to provide a good, legitimate and fair Quick Look. * /Thus, a good Quick Look for the Limited Appeals could identify and eliminate Appeals that are manifestly unfounded and/or an abuse of the right to appeal, drawing on the other Quick Look, would include: / /● The Appeal was not filed on one of the accepted objection grounds; and/or/ /● Filed by a group or organization not a party to the initial Objection, and/or/ /● Insufficient or no evidence is provided to support the Appeal; and/or/ /● the Appeal is far-fetched, clearly invented, manifestly contrary to common sense, or so ambiguous that it is objectively impossible for the DRSP to make sense of it; and/or/ /● The Appeal spreads, incites, promotes, or justifies hatred based on intolerance towards a certain group; and/or/ /● The Appeal includes facts that clearly show that it is manifestly unfounded and/or an abuse to the right to appeal.” And/or / /● The Appeal constitutes harassment of the other parties or the process itself./ *As the DRSP will know how to do this for the initial Objection, they will be capable of and do a good job with review of the Quick Look for these Limited Appeals to prevent frivolous filings and ensure the Limited Appeals process is respected and not abuse. * Best regards, Kathy