USDRP Approval Process

Information Concerning Approval Process for .US Dispute Resolution Service Providers

On 21 February 2002, the United States Department of Commerce adopted the  United States Dispute Resolution Policy (usDRP)  for all registrars serving the .us domain. The policy will became fully operational on 24 April 2002.

Although the policy provides that most domain-name disputes will be resolved by the courts, it also calls for administrative dispute-resolution proceedings to enable streamlined, economical resolution of disputes arising from alleged “abusive registrations.” Under the policy, each administrative proceeding will be administered by a dispute-resolution service provider approved by Neustar.

Organizations seeking provisional approval as service providers under the dispute resolution policy should take the following steps:

  1. Become familiar with the  United States Dispute Resolution Policy and the Rules for United States Dispute Resolution Policy .
  2. Contact Jeffrey J. Neuman (; +1 571 434 5400) to discuss the procedures for submitting an application for approval.
  3. After discussing procedures with Mr. Neuman, submit an application to him by e-mail ( and postal mail:

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
Neustar, Inc.
21575 Ridgetop Circle
Sterling, VA 20166

Applications should contain:

  • An overview of the applicant’s capabilities and background in providing alternative dispute-resolution (ADR) services, including a description of the appliant’s track record of handling the clerical aspects of expedited ADR proceedings.
  • A list of the names and qualifications of the panelists the applicant proposes to include on its published list and a description of the screening requirements applicant has used in selecting panelists to be included on its list.
  • A description of training and educational measures the applicant proposes to employ for listed panelists with respect to domain-name disputes, the usDRP Policy, and the usDRP Rules.
  • A commitment by the applicant not to prevent or discourage any of its listed panelists from serving as panelists for domain-name disputes administered by other approved providers.
  • A copy of the applicant’s proposed supplemental rules (including fee schedule).
  • Documentation of applicant’s proposed internal operating procedures. If requested, Neustar will hold this documentation in confidence.
  • A proposed schedule for applicant’s implementation of its program for administering proceedings under the policy, including a statement of applicant’s administrative capacity in terms of number of proceedings initiated on a monthly basis.
  • A statement of any requested limitiations on the number of proceedings that applicant handles, either during a start-up period or on a permanent basis.
  • A description of how the applicant proposes to administer proceedings, including its interactions with parties, registrars, Neustar, and other approved providers.
  • A description of how the applicant intends to publish decisions of panels in proceedings it administers and a commitment to provide Neustar with copies of all portions of decisions of panels not published.

In general, Neustar examines the applications to determine whether the applicant has demonstrated its ability to handle proceedings in an expedited, global, online context in an orderly and fair manner. Attributes that are especially important include:

  1. Applicant should have a track record in competently handling the clerical aspects of ADR proceedings. Neustar considers proper review of pleadings for administrative compliance and reliable and well-documented distribution of documents to the parties and panels to be essential capabilities for providers. In the absence of a well-established track record in handling the clerical function, a detailed plan for providing those abilities ordinarily must be submitted.
  2. Applicant should propose a list of highly qualified neutrals who have agreed to serve as panelists. Applicant’s list should include at least twenty persons. Applicants are expected thoroughly to train the listed neutrals concerning the policy, the uniform rules, the technology of domain names, and the basic legal principles applicable to domain-name disputes. Accordingly, excessively long lists of neutrals are discouraged. The applicant should either present a list of panelists from multiple countries or, if the applicant initially presents a single-country list, propose a plan to expand its list to become multinational.
  3. Applicant’s supplemental rules and internal procedures should demonstrate that applicant understands the workings of the policy and unifom rules.

Please also note that Neustar’s top priority is to ensure that the usDRP operates in a fair and orderly manner. Neustar’s intent is to only add providers when the fair and orderly operation of the usDRP requires that a particular provider be added. Even then, Neustar’s intent is to add providers only at a measured pace.