RE: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Latest version of the comment review document

["Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I could beginning April 8 or 9.

Michael R. Graham
Senior Corporate Counsel, Intellectual Property
Expedia Legal & Corporate Affairs
T +1 425.679.4330 | F +1 425.679.7251
M +1 425.241.1459
Expedia, Inc.
333 108th Avenue NE | Bellevue | WA 98004
MiGraham@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:MiGraham@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message may contain private, 
confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the intended 
recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this message by others is 
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please (i) contact 
the sender immediately; and (ii) permanently delete the original and any copies 
of the message including file attachments.  Thank you for your cooperation.


From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 11:10 AM
To: Amr Elsadr
Cc: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Latest version of the comment review document

Thanks Amr.  That is helpful.

Is there anyone who absolutely could not do 90 minute calls going forward, at 
least until we get through the public comments?

Chuck

From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 12:30 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Latest version of the comment review document
Importance: High

Hi,

On Mar 28, 2015, at 9:40 PM, Gomes, Chuck 
<cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

[SNIP]

Marika & I talked briefly in Istanbul.  We have not made as much progress on 
going through the public comments as we had hoped and may be in jeopardy of 
missing our target dates.  She suggested that we could get some volunteers (or 
small groups of volunteers) to draft possible responses for subsets of the 
items and then present those to the full WG.  Of course we would need 
volunteers for that to work.  How many of you would be willing to do this?  In 
the cases of the comments from the ALAC, IPC and NCSG, we would need to pair WG 
members from those respective groups with some who are not from those groups. 
Please respond to this email if you are willing to contribute in this way.  
Another option could be to lengthen our calls from 60 minutes to 90 minutes; 
please respond if you could or could not do that.

I would be willing to work on a sub-group, but would prefer the second option 
of 90 minute calls. Just worried about duplicating work, which may not 
necessarily help in sticking to the desired timeline.

Thanks.

Amr