<div dir="ltr">Can ICANN substantiate its purported "<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:16px;line-height:19px">serious concerns about the cost and delay associated with cross examination of witnesses?" In other words, when has there been such an associated cost, in ICANN's opinion? ICANN has fought every time they were asked to provide witnesses, though it has only been a few times.</span><div><br></div><div>To my mind, the issue is not whether there should be cross-examination, but whether there should be witnesses at all. If there are witnesses, then of course they must be subject to cross-examination; otherwise there is no point in having them at all. So I think we should focusing on that slightly broader question whether there should be witnesses at all, rather than whether any witnesses may be cross-examined.</div><div><br></div><div>I think there should be witnesses in any live hearing, as the parties may agree or as the panel deems relevant and necessary. There should not be any "default against" witnesses or cross examination.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Mike</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">Mike Rodenbaugh</div><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">RODENBAUGH LAW</div><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087</div><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small"><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">http://rodenbaugh.com</a> </div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Burr, Becky <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<div><font face="Times New Roman" style="font-size:16px"><br>
</font></div>
<div>
<div>
<p>The current draft provides:</p>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<p>"All hearings shall be limited to argument only." </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This would generally prohibit cross examination of witnesses. There appear to be a number of views among the IOT. Several members think that cross examination of witnesses should be permitted as a matter of course, assuming in the
case of F2F hearings, that the extraordinary circumstances standard has been met. In that case, all we need do is drop the language above.</p>
<p>Others think that cross-examination should be permitted on a case-by-case basis and only where the requesting party demonstrates that the requested cross-examination would meet the 3 part test for “extraordinary circumstances.” The
following language would accomplish that </p>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<p>[<a>unless</a> the IRP Panel determines that<span style="color:red"> the party seeking cross examination of [a] witness[es] has demonstrated that such cross examination is: (1) necessary for a fair resolution of the claim; (2) necessary
to further the PURPOSES OF THE IRP; <i>and</i> (3) considerations of fairness and furtherance of the PURPOSES OF THE IRP outweigh the time and financial expense of witness cross
<a>examination</a></span>.] </p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div style="font-size:14px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:16px;line-height:19px">ICANN continues to have serious concerns about the cost and delay associated with
cross examination of witnesses.</span>
<div>
<div language="JavaScript"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:14px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;margin-top:12pt">
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:14px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;margin-top:12pt">
<b><span style="font-size:9pt;line-height:115%">J. Beckwith Burr</span></b><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#262626">
</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#3366ff"><br>
</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#008656">Neustar, Inc.</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#068658">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#7d7d7d">/</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#068658">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#7d7d7d">Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:gray"><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#008656">Office:</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#7d7d7d">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#7d7d7d"><a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+1.202.533.2932</a>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#008656">Mobile:</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#7d7d7d">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#7d7d7d"><a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a>
<strong><span style="font-family:Arial">/</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#068658">
</span><a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#008656">neustar.biz</span></b></a><span style="font-size:9.0pt;line-height:115%;color:gray"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
IOT mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:IOT@icann.org">IOT@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iot" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/iot</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>