RULE CLARIFICATION REQUEST #1:
Although the questions certified have the attorney-client
privilege waiver issue first and the good faith transferee defense
second, the court opinions discuss the issues in the reverse
order. When organizing the brief, do we need to follow the
order of the questions certified or can we change the order of what
issue goes first?
RULE CLARIFICATION RESPONSE
#1:
The rules do not require that the issues be discussed in any order
so you may structure your argument either way.
RULE CLARIFICATION REQUEST
#2
We had a question about when the brief is actually due. Does
it need to be in your hands on Monday, February 1, 2010, or can it
be postmarked on that Monday?
RULE CLARIFICATION RESPONSE
#2
Rule X(a) requires that you send your briefs to the Board on
Monday, February 1, 2010. It does not require that we receive
them that day. This is a change from prior years and should
make the process easier for you. Please note that the rule
distinguishes between electronic and paper submission of the
briefs. Rule X(a)(i) requires you to submit an electronic PDF
of your brief, and that must be sent to us by e-mail on Monday,
February 1st. In addition, Rule X(a)(ii) requires you to send
us three paper copies plus the signed Certification sheet.
These must be sent by Federal Express or express mail and you must
be prepared to submit proof to the Board that these materials were
received by Federal Express or the Postal Service on Monday,
February 1st. As a practical matter, this means that you must
deliver your package to Federal Express or the Postal Service
before their last official pick-up time in order to obtain a
confirmation dated February 1st. Note that the number of
paper brief copies has been reduced from 5 to 3 and that it is no
longer necessary for you to designate one as a “measuring
brief.” However, all copies of your brief must be
identical.
RULE CLARIFICATION REQUEST
#3
Rule VIII says that the brief should be 35 pages, exclusive of the
statement of jurisdiction, among others. Later in the paragraph, it
says that the Board waives a formal statement of
jurisdiction. Does this mean that we may omit any reference
to a statement of jurisdiction, include a Statement of Jurisdiction
title with nothing under it, or actually have a statement of
jurisdiction despite the waiver?
RULE CLARIFICATION #3
It is your choice and no points will be deducted by the Board
either way. However, we suggest that you include a “Statement
of Jurisdiction” heading with the following statement, “The formal
statement of jurisdiction is waived pursuant to Competition Rule
VIII.” This will prevent any confusion by a brief
grader.
RULE CLARIFICATION REQUEST #4
Rule VIII says that the brief must be bound at the left
margin. Is there a specific binding type required . . .
saddle stitch, perfect binding?
RULE CLARIFICATION #4
No.
RULE CLARIFICATION REQUEST
#5
The Rules provide for a per page margin penalty "...where in the
Board's opinion, the violation gives the team an advantage."
If a timely submitted electronic source brief contains valid
margins, type set and page limits that conform to the rules, but
the printed briefs contain scaling that slightly expands the
margins, would this result in a determination that no competitive
advantage resulted (because of actual conformity of the source
document with typeset, margin and page limits) from the print
scaling (and therefore no penalty), or would penalties be
applied? Put another way, is the electronic source document
considered the measuring brief?
RULE CLARIFICATION # 5
We do not see your inquiry as requesting an interpretation of our
rules. Nonetheless, we will respond as follows: Rule X
requires that all copies of the brief be identical. This
includes the electronic copy. Because of this requirement,
the rules no longer require a “measuring brief”. However, as
a practical matter the brief we actually measure is a printed
brief. A trivial variation in margins from print scaling is
unlikely to be large enough to be noticed. The rather
sizeable stated penalty for type size or margin violations in Rule
XXIII is limited to situations that appear to give an advantage –
e.g., where the brief is at the page limit and the type size or
margin violation allows the team to exceed the length
restriction. This does not appear to be the situation that
you are describing. Note, however, that the Board may assess
a penalty for any violation of the rules and likely will assess a
small penalty for a technical formatting violation even if there is
no advantage. These will likely be one point or less for each
different type of violation (rather than the per page penalty
stated for violations giving an advantage).
RULE CLARIFICATION #6
Is there a required order in which the issues must be argued during
the oral rounds? If it is up to the teams to decide, must the
Respondent follow the Petitioner's choice (i.e., if Petitioner
argues fraudulent conveyance first, must Respondent also argue that
issue first)?
RULE CLARIFICATION #6
The rules do not require that the issues be argued in any
particular order. Nor do they require that the Respondent
follow the same order as the Petitioner.