It's in the UDRP decision that Dave posted.Okay, fill me in on the details
Every UDRP case commenced on a Monday has a Sunday response deadline (no other weekday + 20 days ends on a weekend). UDRP cases are only commenced on M-F.
Traditionally, WIPO has accepted responses filed on the Monday following a Sunday deadline. That's pretty much standard practice in state courts, federal courts, the courts of European nations, administrative bodies, and so on. It's even standard under other procedures administered by WIPO.
Interestingly, after WIPO cashed the $2K payment for the three member panel, the Complainant objected to the response being filed on Monday, and requested leave to file additional comments if the Panel considered the response.
So, what the panel did was "decide not to decide" the timely filing issue and to deny the complaint "on their own", so that they then wouldn't have to deal with the complainant's request to file additional stuff.
The upshot is to shave an additional two days off of UDRP response time in the Western Hemisphere, unless your attorney works on weekends. However, that is on top of the extra screw job you get in NZ and AUS because respondents there are notified "today" (in NZ) of a case commenced "yesterday" (in Switzerland).
Now, UDRP rule 2(f) expressly states that a transmission is made from the time zone where sent, but a few panels lately have been ignoring that.
My question is - if the Response was untimely then why did they take our money and appoint a three member panel?







Reply With Quote







Bookmarks