<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font face="Verdana">Thanks Greg, I sent my earlier email before
I saw this email of yours, but yes you have rightly picked the
key points.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">There will always be some grey zones and overlaps
in areas of social sciences, including legal studies and
systems. But the distinction is clear enough to be often spoken
of in court judgements and so on. In case of private law, the
state has no interest at all in a situation unless a private
party seeks enforcement. In case of public law, it is the larger
society, or the state on its behalf, which has direct stake and
interest in the issue, and can take up the matter suo motto, or
on it being brought to its notice by an individual. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">With regard to our current discussion, the
element of 'choice of jurisdiction' becomes important in showing
an important difference between these two kinds of laws. In case
of public law, there is simply no choice of jurisdiction ever.
You attach yourself to a society, you are subject to its public
law. No choices here. But in case of private law there can be,
though not always, the possibility of choice of jurisdiction,
like two parties entering a contract mutually agreeing on a
particular jurisdiction for dispute resolution. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Therefore these two classes of laws have to
be discussed separately when we do the jurisdiction discussion -
they admit of entirely different treatment. Public law
application in fully and inextricably linked to place of
incorporation/ HQ location/ substantial physical operations. In
many important cases of private law however there can be a
choice, and how this choice can and should be exercised will be
a distinct area of discussion and recommendation of this group.
However, the discussion and possible recommendation will have to
be entirely different is case there is no choice of jurisdiction
involved, which is true for application of public law. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"></font>parmidner<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Tuesday 11 October 2016 09:11 PM,
Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+aOHUQcxZBzSQS-zFw85NMhH=iR3+bKskr=jnL1O1Av+Q5AVQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I echo Jeff's
question.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Milton's definition
is one possible one, but I'm not sure that is what Parminder
means. I agree that Milton's tracks my general
understanding of how those terms might be used in a U.S.
common law context. All US legislation is considered
"Public Law".</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">However,
five minutes of Google</font><font face="times new roman,
serif" size="1"> </font><font face="verdana, sans-serif">searching
reveals significantly different uses. It appears that in
Civil law, stemming from Roman law, the terms are used
define (i) laws governing the activities of the state and
the interaction between the state and the individual or
private entity vs. laws governing the activities of
individuals/private entities and their interaction with
each other.</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">In
International law, "international public law" governs the
actions of nations (but may in the case of treaties be
turned into laws that govern the actions of individuals),
while "international private law" applies directly to the
acts of individuals and business entities.</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">There
also appears to be a usage of these two terms based on how
the laws are enforced -- a public law is one enforced by
the state, while a private law is enforced by one
individual/entity against another. However, there are
many laws (at least in the US) that offer both state and
private causes of action (e.g., both Department of Justice
or a private plaintiff can bring a claim under the
Americans with Disabilities Act). While criminal laws can
only be enforced by the State (on behalf of the People),
many criminal laws have civil law counterparts (e.g.,
murder/manslaughter vs. wrongful death, theft vs.
conversion, etc. Broadly, Tort law is a series of private
causes of action that are roughly equivalent with criminal
causes of action); of course, imprisonment is exclusively
a criminal law remedy (at least in the US). There are
also concepts (such as Qui Tam and Article 78 proceedings)
where state action can either be started or challenged by
private actors under certain circumstances; these further
blur the public/private distinction in this system of
classification..</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Finally,
looking at various items found in the search, it appears
that there are some countries (both civil and common law
jurisdictions) where this classification is actively used,
and others where it is not. So it is neither universal,
nor understood the same way when it is used.</font></div>
<font face="verdana, sans-serif"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_GoBack"></a></font>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><b>Parminder, Can you
clarify what you mean by "public law" and "private law"?
Without a better understanding, it would be premature to
answer your question. Alternatively, you could rephrase
this without reliance on a public law/private law
dichotomy. Thanks!</b></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><b><br>
</b></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:21 AM,
Mueller, Milton L <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu"
target="_blank">milton@gatech.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="white" link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US">
<div class="m_-6986821756689306673WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Public
law is legislation/court precedent, private law is
contract.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
Jeff Neuman [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"
target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.<wbr>com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, October 11, 2016 11:20
AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Mueller, Milton L <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu"
target="_blank">milton@gatech.edu</a>>;
parminder <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>;
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org"
target="_blank">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Our
work so far, and a way forward</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="m_-6986821756689306673__MailEndCompose"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Although
I am a properly licensed attorney in the
United States, I am not clear on what the
definition is of “public law” vs. private
law. That is not a concept that I am
familiar with. Are talking about statutory
law vs. common law, or are we talking about
private causes of action vs. government
causes of action.</span></a><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Sorry,
but just trying to wrap my head around this
and why it matters.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#0f9347"
lang="EN-GB">Jeffrey J. Neuman</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-GB"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#0f9347"
lang="EN-GB">Senior Vice President </span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">|</span><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#c39209"
lang="EN-GB">Valideus USA</span></b><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#c32830"
lang="EN-GB">
</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">| </span><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#c32830"
lang="EN-GB">Com Laude USA</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-GB"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">Mclean, VA 22102, United States</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">E:
</span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com"
target="_blank"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#00b050"
lang="EN-GB">jeff.neuman@valideus.com</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#595959"
lang="EN-GB"> or </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"
target="_blank"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#00b050"
lang="EN-GB">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#00b050">
<span lang="EN-GB"></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">T: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1.703.635.7514"
value="+17036357514" target="_blank">+1.703.635.7514</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">M: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1.202.549.5079"
value="+12025495079" target="_blank">+1.202.549.5079</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4f4f4f"
lang="EN-GB">@Jintlaw</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@<wbr>icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-<wbr>bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mueller, Milton L<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, October 11, 2016
10:51 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>;
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org"
target="_blank">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Our
work so far, and a way forward</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I
don’t think the question of public law is out
of consideration. There is much talk of
“applicable [public] law” when we consider
dispute resolution/choice of law, for example.
However, it is not clear how those issues fit
into the “jurisdiction layer” model that seems
to be clarifying and driving our agenda. So I
hope Greg and Vinay can weigh in on that issue
for us.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">If
I understand you correctly, public law issues
are analogous to a “stress test;” there is no
major issue with it now, but we need to
explore how the new ICANN regime will react if
something happens. E.g., the European
Commission opens an antitrust investigation
into ICANN, or a (unlikely) Trump
administration pushes a bill through Congress
re-regulating ICANN</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid
#e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@<wbr>icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-<wbr>bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>parminder<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, October 11, 2016
3:59 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org"
target="_blank">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction]
Our work so far, and a way forward</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Monday 10 October 2016
10:28 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">All,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">In
order to move forward, and based on
the discussions so far, I suggest the
following approach.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">First,
we should continue the current
approach of defining and refining the
various layers of jurisdiction, and I
encourage you all to go to the Google
doc and add your views. </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oE9xDIAJhr4Nx7vNO_mWotSXuUtTgJMRs6U92yTgOH4/edit?usp=sharing"
target="_blank"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">https://docs.google.com/<wbr>document/d/1oE9xDIAJhr4Nx7vNO_<wbr>mWotSXuUtTgJMRs6U92yTgOH4/<wbr>edit?usp=sharing</span></a><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Second,
we won't investigate changing ICANN's
headquarters or incorporation
jurisdiction at this time. However,
it's not off the table -- if we
identify an issue during our work and
we can't find a less drastic way to
deal with that issue, we will revisit
this point at that time. We can then
revisit the concerns that people have
raised regarding such a recommendation
in the context of a particular issue.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
While I can always insert this in the Google
doc, I prefer to first discuss this here. (And
yes I am repeating it.) The jurisdiction issue
is best divided as (1) application of public
law, (2) application of private law, (3) the
rest of sundry stuff - like about different
global offices and interaction with respective
domestic jurisdiction (these are of relatively
minor significance, and there may not be much
to 'decide' about them in advance)<br>
<br>
Place of incorporation and location of HQ
(which is almost always the same) may be the
proxy for 'application of public law' but they
do not necessarily conflate. US government by
decree has given jurisdictional immunities
even to such bodies that are *not* created
under international law and simply registered
as private bodies, in the US or elsewhere.
This certainly is an important possibility to
look into for ICANN, which insulates it from
application of US public law - in terms of its
key organisational activities -- without
moving the headquarters or even jurisdiction
of incorporation. <br>
<br>
I will repeat the question I put to the chairs
in my last email: "<span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">are
we considering this issue of application of
US public law to ICANN, and the problems
that it may cause with respect to its policy
processes, and being able to appropriately
carry out its global governance role? " <br>
<br>
The concerns around application of public
law are very different than those of
application of private law -- and often
different actors have these two different
kinds of concerns. Public law also have
application over private law cases.
<br>
<br>
If this group does not intend to get into
the 'application of public law' question and
stick to issues of private law, then let it
decide and state as much in clear terms.
Such actors whose interest in the
jurisdiction question comes primarily from
the public law aspect can then disengage
from spending further time in this process -
as for instance I will like to do.
</span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Third,
we should put aside "confirming and
assessing the gap analysis" for the
moment. There is still a diversity of
views on what this "gap analysis" was
and what we need to do to confirm and
assess it. As a result, our time has
been spent discussing the parameters
of the assignment, rather than working
on the assignment itself. I believe
that we will be better able to define
the scope of this item and move to
substance, if we spend some time
looking at the substance of an issue
that is clearly within our scope.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">After
we finish clarifying the multiple
layers of jurisdiction, we should move
to an issue that is clearly within our
scope -- something we have to do.
That way we can move to the substance
of the issue and not spend a lot of
time on "scope."</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">An
issue that is clearly within our scope
relates to ICANN's jurisdictions for
settlement of disputes (i.e., venue
and choice of law).
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
One way is to look at this is as concerning
the application of private law on iCANN
matters. But then, like in the case of .xxx,
what if the dispute invokes a public law (US
competition law in this instance) -- which one
can be assured that every disputant will do as
long as it can find a favourable US public law
which seems to side with the way the disputant
wants things to go. As we explore the issue of
'settlement of disputes' are we going to look
only to private law part and not public law?
That IMHO would be quite inappropriate. But
then if we are going to look into both
private law and public law elements, the
discussion gets messy because private law can
involve choice of jurisdiction but not public
law. This is why I think it is best if we
divide our work and discussions as I suggested
above, separately about issues of public law
and those of private law.
<br>
<br>
But, as I said before, issues of public law
are simply out, let us then be clear about it.
I request a clarification by the chairs.
</p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">There
should not be any question that this
is within the scope of our group
(Annex 12 refers to this as the
"focus" for our group). Based on
Annex 12, this involves looking
at: "The influence that ICANN’s
existing jurisdiction" relating to
resolution of disputes "may have on
the actual operation of policies
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
Application of US public law on ICANN has
enormous influence on 'actual operation of
(ICANN) policies'. And so we are very much
within our mandate in discussing issues
arising from 'public law' aspect.
</p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">and
accountability mechanisms." I suggest
that we examine this "influence" and
determine what this "influence" is.
Our work looking at venue and choice
of law in the "multiple layers of
jurisdiction" will help us in this
task.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
I gave a few instances in my last email of
influence of US public law on operation of
ICANN policies. Would these examples qualify
to be considered under this or not?</p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">A
note on process -- it is very
important that we focus on creating
written material. In our calls, we
should be working on and working from
these written materials. Ultimately,
these writings will feed into our
deliverable. Put another way, you
should focus your contributions on
adding to the drafts (currently, the
"layers of jurisdiction" document),
rather than on relying solely on oral
interventions in our calls -- after
all we have 168 hours in a week, and
only 1 hour for our call.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
I agree. Calls can only help confirm or
resolve some outstanding issues, and lay
further directions. What we can accomplish in
writing we should do. In that regard, I also
think that to th extent issues can be
addressed and resolved in email exchanges here
they best be done so...<br>
<br>
Thanks, parminder </p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">I
look forward to our upcoming call.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"><br>
Best regards,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Greg
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> </p>
<pre>______________________________<wbr>_________________</pre>
<pre>Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list</pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" target="_blank">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a>
</blockquote></div>
</div>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body></html>