TheCorporateCounsel.net

We are seeing quick turnaround these days with publication in the Federal Register – so we didn’t expressly call out that the SEC’s proposed “Regulation E-Delivery” was published back in late July, not too long after the proposal was issued. As I mentioned in this blog on the various outstanding proposals, comments are due September 21st.

We are continuing to post memos about the proposal in our “E-Delivery” Practice Area. This Gibson Dunn memo shares a few questions that companies may want to weigh in on during the comment period:

• Whether electronic addresses collected by an issuer’s transfer agent or proxy solicitor, or a NOBO list, could be used for default e-delivery;

• The retention of the NOIA process (and related 40-day deadline) as an alternative for proxy statements;

• The extent of an issuer’s obligation to identify and remediate e-delivery failures (e.g., bounce backs);

• The definition of PFI, including whether it should exclude addresses and general brokerage information; and

• The creation of a hybrid solution for shareholder lists under Rule 14a-7 so issuers could agree to forward electronic communications from third parties while providing requestors with mailing addresses.

Also check out Dave’s and Meredith’s earlier blogs on the proposal:

– “From the 1990s to Now: The SEC Proposes a New E-Delivery Approach”

– “E-Delivery Proposal: Digging In to the Details”

– “E-Delivery Proposal: Proxy Materials & Prospectuses“

– Liz Dunshee