[CWG-Stewardship] Client Committee -- Further Update

[John Poole]

Dear Greg:
Thanks for the update and your offer--"If there are any specific subjects
you would like me to try to cover, please let me know"--

1. Each prospective firm's understanding of the scope of representation
required by CWG-Stewardship in this matter.

2. Each prospective firm’s experience, generally, in Corporate (including
non-profit), Contract, and Trust law and litigation (state and federal),
and specifically, in California and the New York Supreme Court (Manhattan)
jurisdictions.
3. Each prospective firm's understanding of the identity of the client in
this matter, and the respective roles of ICANN, ICANN legal staff, and
ICANN counsel.

In addition, it may be helpful if you would explain to CWG-Stewardship the
specific role(s) being played within the Client Committee and its processes
by ICANN staff, including specifically, Samantha Eisner, a member of the
ICANN legal staff who you indicated "will also be on the calls"--*e.g.*,
(a) Why is Samantha Eisner on the calls? (b) What role has and is she
playing within the Client Committee? (c) Will she also be asking questions
and interviewing the prospective firms, if so, why? (d) Did ICANN
unilaterally disqualify or eliminate from consideration any of the
prospective firms originally on the Client Committee list, and if so, can
you identify the firm(s) and the reason given?

Finally, given that your scheduled interviews will be completed March 2,
and you have indicated further steps will be required thereafter, what is
now your best estimate of the date when a firm will actually be retained
and available to CWG-Stewardship as independent legal counsel?

Best regards,
John Poole


> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:42:52 -0500
> From: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> To: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Client Committee -- Further Update
> Message-ID:
>         <CA+aOHUT5EQDzLsNGcH0xwU+ogWFi=
> RHNB8bNN0_wwNr4XxPV-Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> All:
>
> The Client Committee has now scheduled conference calls with each of the
> three "short list" firms.  These meetings are scheduled for Thursday,
> February 26, Friday, February 27, and Monday, March 2.  The calls are
> expected to last 60-90 minutes.
>
> In addition to the Client Committee, Leon Sanchez, a member of the CCWG
> legal committee, will be sitting in on most, if not all, of the calls.
> Samantha Eisner, a member of the ICANN legal staff, will also be on the
> calls.
>
> Each of the firms have seen the legal scoping document and the Singapore
> discussion document, and provided a link to the CWG's wiki page  They were
> also informed of today's US Senate hearing beforehand.
>
> As noted before, we will ask the firms' permission to reveal their
> identities at this stage and for permission to circulate their
> submissions.  We will also make clear to them that, if chosen, the
> representation should be designed to meet transparency and accountability
> standards beyond those typically encountered in the attorney-client
> relationship (which tend to value confidentiality and the maintenance of
> the attorney-client privilege)
>
> I expect that we will schedule a call for as soon as possible after the 3
> meetings take place to discuss and compare the firms and move forward
> toward engaging one of the firms on our behalf.  We may also have further
> prep/debrief calls around the conferences.
>
> In a addition, we are in the process of preparing documents to memorialize
> our initial selection criteria/process, so that it can be better
> understood.  We will keep you informed of the process as it progresses.  If
> there are any specific subjects you would like me to try to cover, please
> let me know.
>
> Greg
>
> --
>
> *Gregory S. Shatan
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150225/210a3fe5/attachment.html>