RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI Meeting 06 March Re-Submitting a Motion

["Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ron,
I had wanted to report to SCI that in its full meeting in Beijing, the IPC 
agreed to the first two criteria listed in Item 2 of the "one or more high 
level criteria" to be set for resubmitting a motion.

Anne

[cid:548334018@29052013-21FF]Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
Lewis and Roca LLP • Suite 700
One South Church Avenue • Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
Tel (520) 629-4428 • Fax (520) 879-4725
AAikman@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxx> • 
www.LewisandRoca.com/Aikman<http://www.lewisandroca.com/Aikman>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
This e-mail contains legally privileged and confidential information
intended only for the individual or entity named within the message.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is prohibited.  If this communication
was received in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original 
message.


________________________________
From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ron Andruff
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:49 AM
To: 'James M. Bladel'; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Jennifer Standiford'
Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI Meeting 
06 March -- Re-Submitting a Motion

Thank you James and Jennifer for the quick turnaround on this matter.  As I 
understand it, the request for re-submitting a motion had never happened before 
the first occasion, which brought it to our table, but I agree that it would be 
for the Committee to discuss the idea of frequency to make sure we are all of 
like mind as to what this would mean.

By way of this mail, I am asking Julie to be sure to include this in our next 
meeting.

Kind regards,

RA

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.<http://www.rnapartners.com>
________________________________
From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2013 9:51 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Jennifer Standiford
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI Meeting 
06 March -- Re-Submitting a Motion
Importance: High

Hello SCI Team:

Last week, Jennifer and I were able to consult with the Registrar Stakeholder 
Group (RrSG) on this issue.  We can report that RrSG members strongly favor 
Option #2.

Additionally, Registrars agree with the proposed criteria listed, -except- for 
item #2.4, which they note could be redundant if Items #2.1-#2.3 are followed.  
Finally, RrSG members would like to see the inclusion of some limitations (per 
year or minimum time frame) on how frequently a motion may be re-introduced.

We look forward to further discussions on our next call.

Thanks--

J.
From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 15:45
To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI Meeting 06 
March -- Re-Submitting a Motion

Dear SCI members,

This is a reminder of the action item on re-submitting a motion.  The action 
item is as follows:

-- Re-Submitting a Motion -- SCI members: Circulate the options to their 
Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies.

It is our understanding that we still need to hear from the Intellectual 
Property Constituency and the Registrar Stakeholder Group.  All of the other 
representatives on the SCI support option 2 below with all the criteria.

Best regards,
Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

Possible Options for Addressing the Re-Submission of a Motion:

1.  Leave up to discretion of the Chair

2.  Set one or more high-level criteria (in this order):

1)  Provide a reasoning to justify the resubmission of a motion. Complete no 
later than the deadline for submitting a motion --  8 days prior to  the next 
GNSO Council meeting.
2)  Publish the text of the re-submitted motion. Complete no later than the 
deadline for submitting a motion --  8 days prior to  the next GNSO Council 
meeting.
3)  Require a seconder of the motion from each house as a prerequisite for 
placing the re-submission of the motion on the consent agenda.
4)  Allow a councilor to ask for the re-submission of the motion to be taken 
off the consent agenda and to request a Council vote on whether to accept the 
re-submission.



________________________________

For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to 
www.lewisandroca.com<http://www.lewisandroca.com/>.

Phoenix (602)262-5311           Reno (775)823-2900
Tucson (520)622-2090            Albuquerque (505)764-5400
Las Vegas (702)949-8200         Silicon Valley (650)391-1380

  This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying 
to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone.

  In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that 
if this email contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or 
written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of 
avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.