The preliminary challenge resolved nine days before the midpoint assessment.
The external accountability body's finding upheld Yeon's procedural objection. The complaint's indirect client relationship was ruled insufficient to establish standing under the body's own filing requirements, and the guild was given the option to refile through a direct relationship if one existed, or to withdraw. Refiling required the workshop supervisor himself to be named as the complainant rather than the guild, which meant the supervisor's own conduct during the posting period — including his presence at the substitution filing and his subsequent silence about it — would become part of the record under direct examination.
The guild withdrew the complaint within the week.
