From chris.stewart at uky.edu  Tue Jul  1 13:52:11 2014
From: chris.stewart at uky.edu (Stewart, Christopher K)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 09:52:11 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] conference call for LSAT
Message-ID: <CAAyF1PD9B3Tz3o5w=U28Ttei6rd3j=eW7P=pGSL8gE+jVKUcuw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I tried replying to offer my services as a notetaker for the
conference call and to write a memo to distribute afterward, but the
list said I am not a member. Not sure what happened there, but
hopefully this reaches the right ears.

Best,
Chris

Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757


From taiablas at gmail.com  Tue Jul  1 13:59:00 2014
From: taiablas at gmail.com (Tai Blas)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 08:59:00 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] conference call for LSAT
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PD9B3Tz3o5w=U28Ttei6rd3j=eW7P=pGSL8gE+jVKUcuw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PD9B3Tz3o5w=U28Ttei6rd3j=eW7P=pGSL8gE+jVKUcuw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6A8C7745-7B50-4A9A-A341-4ADDBE7376D8@gmail.com>

I too would be willing to help take notes.

Tai Tomasi
J.D. Candidate, class of 2014
Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.

> On Jul 1, 2014, at 8:52 AM, "Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I tried replying to offer my services as a notetaker for the
> conference call and to write a memo to distribute afterward, but the
> list said I am not a member. Not sure what happened there, but
> hopefully this reaches the right ears.
> 
> Best,
> Chris
> 
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com

From mnowicki4 at icloud.com  Wed Jul  2 09:25:19 2014
From: mnowicki4 at icloud.com (Michael Nowicki)
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 11:25:19 +0200
Subject: [blindlaw] conference call for LSAT
In-Reply-To: <6A8C7745-7B50-4A9A-A341-4ADDBE7376D8@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PD9B3Tz3o5w=U28Ttei6rd3j=eW7P=pGSL8gE+jVKUcuw@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A8C7745-7B50-4A9A-A341-4ADDBE7376D8@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3B0C3AE9-A60A-4D02-BCDF-9F30F7F2168C@icloud.com>

Will the Notes be posted to this mailing list?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 1, 2014, at 3:59 PM, Tai Blas via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> I too would be willing to help take notes.
> 
> Tai Tomasi
> J.D. Candidate, class of 2014
> Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
> Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.
> 
>> On Jul 1, 2014, at 8:52 AM, "Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I tried replying to offer my services as a notetaker for the
>> conference call and to write a memo to distribute afterward, but the
>> list said I am not a member. Not sure what happened there, but
>> hopefully this reaches the right ears.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Chris
>> 
>> Chris K. Stewart
>> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
>> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
>> Ph:
>> (502)457-1757
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mnowicki4%40icloud.com


From dricken at gmail.com  Thu Jul  3 14:35:25 2014
From: dricken at gmail.com (Kendrick Kennedy)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 09:35:25 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
Message-ID: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>

Hello All,

Does anyone have suggestions for a legal office management package that is
assessable with Zoomtext 10?

From Susan.Kelly at pima.gov  Thu Jul  3 15:20:58 2014
From: Susan.Kelly at pima.gov (Susan Kelly)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 15:20:58 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
In-Reply-To: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380AC0E4@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>

Based on prior  research that I did when our office was looking at getting a file management system, I am not sure that such a thing exists.  In any event, do not waste time / money on JustWare, which is the package our office went with a couple of years ago.  I know that it is not accessible with JAWS (I also use MAGic for viewing images when absolutely necessary, but the size required for me to see the fields in JW make it not an option, either).  I have also heard from virtually all of my fully-sighted co-workers that it is horribly slow and prone to crashes and errors on nearly a daily basis. 

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kendrick Kennedy via blindlaw
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 7:35 AM
To: NFB Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software

Hello All,

Does anyone have suggestions for a legal office management package that is assessable with Zoomtext 10?
_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/susan.kelly%40pima.gov


From kerrireg at gmail.com  Thu Jul  3 15:44:12 2014
From: kerrireg at gmail.com (Kerri Regan)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 11:44:12 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
In-Reply-To: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380AC0E4@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>
References: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380AC0E4@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>
Message-ID: <CAKRp2iT5nK3rPpBhn7S1wUVPrdpQ+HyVfseSvgBN3QXshAMcqg@mail.gmail.com>

The office where I'm interning uses Prevail. I tried it with four
different screenreaders and it didn't work with any of them. Maybe
you'd  have better luck with ZoomText. Has either NFB or ACB contacted
the manufacturers of software like this to request accessibility
improvements? When I called Prevail they didn't seem to know what I
was talking about but promised to pass my request on to management.
Haven't heard back since. I'm a paralegal student with a semester to
go before I'm certified and I'm starting to worry that the
inaccessibility of most case management software will make finding and
maintaining a position in a law office a lot harder than anticipated.
Thanks for bringing this topic up. Kerri

On 7/3/14, Susan Kelly via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Based on prior  research that I did when our office was looking at getting a
> file management system, I am not sure that such a thing exists.  In any
> event, do not waste time / money on JustWare, which is the package our
> office went with a couple of years ago.  I know that it is not accessible
> with JAWS (I also use MAGic for viewing images when absolutely necessary,
> but the size required for me to see the fields in JW make it not an option,
> either).  I have also heard from virtually all of my fully-sighted
> co-workers that it is horribly slow and prone to crashes and errors on
> nearly a daily basis.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kendrick
> Kennedy via blindlaw
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 7:35 AM
> To: NFB Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
>
> Hello All,
>
> Does anyone have suggestions for a legal office management package that is
> assessable with Zoomtext 10?
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/susan.kelly%40pima.gov
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kerrireg%40gmail.com
>


From Susan.Kelly at pima.gov  Thu Jul  3 15:59:18 2014
From: Susan.Kelly at pima.gov (Susan Kelly)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 15:59:18 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
In-Reply-To: <CAKRp2iT5nK3rPpBhn7S1wUVPrdpQ+HyVfseSvgBN3QXshAMcqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380AC0E4@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>
	<CAKRp2iT5nK3rPpBhn7S1wUVPrdpQ+HyVfseSvgBN3QXshAMcqg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380AC122@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>

That has been my experience when my supervisor and I have tried to speak with the makers of JustWare - the prevailing opinion in the software creation world seems to be that if it is run on the internet (on a restricted access / password protected), it must be accessible.  Freedom Scientific has been great at helping to set things up to work with our network, another huge problem for accessibility software in our office, but short of getting permission from the file management software maker to go in and make permit edits to their program, it will not work.  They initially offered to put a software engineer at our disposal, then reneged on that as well.

I agree with Kerri - this is a HUGE problem, and I don't think it is limited to the legal field, since file management software seems to be the tech toy of the moment.  There is no reason why proper accessibility guidelines can't be followed in creating these applications, other than laziness and the pursuit of profit, as it would admittedly take more labor-time to get the programs created.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Kerri Regan [mailto:kerrireg at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 8:44 AM
To: Susan Kelly; Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software

The office where I'm interning uses Prevail. I tried it with four different screenreaders and it didn't work with any of them. Maybe you'd  have better luck with ZoomText. Has either NFB or ACB contacted the manufacturers of software like this to request accessibility improvements? When I called Prevail they didn't seem to know what I was talking about but promised to pass my request on to management.
Haven't heard back since. I'm a paralegal student with a semester to go before I'm certified and I'm starting to worry that the inaccessibility of most case management software will make finding and maintaining a position in a law office a lot harder than anticipated.
Thanks for bringing this topic up. Kerri

On 7/3/14, Susan Kelly via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Based on prior  research that I did when our office was looking at 
> getting a file management system, I am not sure that such a thing 
> exists.  In any event, do not waste time / money on JustWare, which is 
> the package our office went with a couple of years ago.  I know that 
> it is not accessible with JAWS (I also use MAGic for viewing images 
> when absolutely necessary, but the size required for me to see the 
> fields in JW make it not an option, either).  I have also heard from 
> virtually all of my fully-sighted co-workers that it is horribly slow 
> and prone to crashes and errors on nearly a daily basis.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
> Kendrick Kennedy via blindlaw
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 7:35 AM
> To: NFB Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
>
> Hello All,
>
> Does anyone have suggestions for a legal office management package 
> that is assessable with Zoomtext 10?
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/susan.kelly%40pi
> ma.gov
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kerrireg%40gmail
> .com
>


From awildheir at gmail.com  Thu Jul  3 18:17:00 2014
From: awildheir at gmail.com (Aimee Harwood)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 14:17:00 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accessible Legal Office Management Software
In-Reply-To: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACFZqTrVQE07u-2_f4ZMAWeivvccNME3oY+Rqi+7RBDsuy+m9w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3A0F6428-D022-4E48-9978-C2B54AA8F39C@gmail.com>

Has anybody tried Time Matters?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 3, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Kendrick Kennedy via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> Does anyone have suggestions for a legal office management package that is
> assessable with Zoomtext 10?
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com


From deepa.goraya at gmail.com  Sat Jul  5 17:29:59 2014
From: deepa.goraya at gmail.com (Deepa Goraya)
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 10:29:59 -0700
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT
In-Reply-To: <00ce01cf9334$e4dd8920$ae989b60$@gmail.com>
References: <1403464944.69358.YahooMailNeo@web162904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<00ce01cf9334$e4dd8920$ae989b60$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <01c101cf9876$bf754410$3e5fcc30$@gmail.com>

I would also like to participate in the conference.

Deepa

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Sexton,
bruce via blindlaw
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2014 5:56 PM
To: 'John G.'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT

Anyone interested to phone conference about the LSAT, strategies, blindness
techniques etc.?



-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John G. via
blindlaw
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2014 11:22 AM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT

Hello,
My name is John Gardner, I am a totally blind Criminal Justice student at
the Junior level, and in the fall I will be a senior, and I am planning on
attending law school in the fall of 2015. I was just wondering from you guys
what did you guys as blind people do to study for the LSAT? Did you guys
just read LSAT prep book, or anything else? I have been reading and studying
from LSAT prep books, but I was just wondering if there is anything else I
should be doing in preparing for the LSAT. Are there any suggestions any of
you guys may offer me to make my LSAT testing go as smoothly as possible?

Thanks
John Gardner
_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.
com


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/deepa.goraya%40gmail.c
om



From d-benbow at live.com  Sat Jul  5 19:06:12 2014
From: d-benbow at live.com (Dawn Benbow)
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 15:06:12 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] introduction
Message-ID: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>

Hi everyone,

	I'm a paralegal student at Madonna University, in their 4 year Paralegal Bachelors program. I'm going to be a senior in the fall and graduating next May. Part of my program requires an internship. I've been trying to find one for the last few months with very little success. Do any of you have any suggestions where I might be able to find either internships, or even an entry level position as a Paralegal, which would be prefferable to me. 

	I've also thought about going to law school at some point, but am undecided. Right now, my family, I'm married with two kids, needs my extra income, but my professors think I would do well as an attorney.

	Thanks for any advice you guys can give.

Dawn
Sent from my iPhone

From chrisgriggs0 at gmail.com  Sat Jul  5 23:23:50 2014
From: chrisgriggs0 at gmail.com (Chris Griggs)
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 18:23:50 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] introduction
In-Reply-To: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4BE0CFDE-433D-4333-AEE9-1B735F42ECD6@gmail.com>

I managed to get one with my city government. I was only able to do it because of the relatively small size of our city (about 50k). I started with a letter of introduction with the City Counseler, but wound up working with the prosecutor also. I spent a lot of time doing admin work though. Good luck, it's a lot of work to get them to create a position for you. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 5, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Dawn Benbow via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
>    I'm a paralegal student at Madonna University, in their 4 year Paralegal Bachelors program. I'm going to be a senior in the fall and graduating next May. Part of my program requires an internship. I've been trying to find one for the last few months with very little success. Do any of you have any suggestions where I might be able to find either internships, or even an entry level position as a Paralegal, which would be prefferable to me. 
> 
>    I've also thought about going to law school at some point, but am undecided. Right now, my family, I'm married with two kids, needs my extra income, but my professors think I would do well as an attorney.
> 
>    Thanks for any advice you guys can give.
> 
> Dawn
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/chrisgriggs0%40gmail.com


From kerrireg at gmail.com  Sat Jul  5 23:55:25 2014
From: kerrireg at gmail.com (Kerri Regan)
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 19:55:25 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] introduction
In-Reply-To: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <F77F36E4-20EA-4ABB-884A-3AB4A0B72E01@gmail.com>

Hi Dawn. Nice to see another paralegal-to-be on here, I'll be getting my  certificate in  December.  I'm currently working on an internship which I got through my school's Legal Studies program. That's always a good resource for both internship and job placement assistance. If your school has any clubs  or  activities  for legal students, definitely check them out. I learned a lot by attending our Alumni Night. You might also want to look into your local Paralegal Society. The one near me isn't very active but I've heard that groups like that are great places to learn and network. Best of luck going forward, Kerri

Sent From My IPhone 

> On Jul 5, 2014, at 3:06 PM, Dawn Benbow via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
>    I'm a paralegal student at Madonna University, in their 4 year Paralegal Bachelors program. I'm going to be a senior in the fall and graduating next May. Part of my program requires an internship. I've been trying to find one for the last few months with very little success. Do any of you have any suggestions where I might be able to find either internships, or even an entry level position as a Paralegal, which would be prefferable to me. 
> 
>    I've also thought about going to law school at some point, but am undecided. Right now, my family, I'm married with two kids, needs my extra income, but my professors think I would do well as an attorney.
> 
>    Thanks for any advice you guys can give.
> 
> Dawn
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kerrireg%40gmail.com


From philosopher25 at gmail.com  Tue Jul  8 23:44:42 2014
From: philosopher25 at gmail.com (Sexton, bruce)
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:44:42 -0800
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT
In-Reply-To: <02f901cf93bc$f8a45e10$e9ed1a30$@labarrelaw.com>
References: <0E1A624E-B80F-4FEA-9ADC-278EDDD3CD5E@gmail.com>
	<02f901cf93bc$f8a45e10$e9ed1a30$@labarrelaw.com>
Message-ID: <00ba01cf9b06$98fde980$caf9bc80$@gmail.com>

Hi Scott,

Are you willing to set up the conference number?  I have not coordinated one
in a while, so am not familiar with the conference services out there.
Otherwise, I am happy to search around the internet for a free conference
service and set it up. 

It is best that we have this call in July or early august if possible, in my
opinion.  

Please advise,
Bruce 


-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Scott C.
LaBarre via blindlaw
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:10 AM
To: 'Aimee Harwood'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT

Hmmm, my sent box shows text and so does my copy of my message that came
through Blindlaw but here is my message again.  Of course, if your program
or setting are indicating no text from me, this explanation will probably
register as no content.  

I do think this would be an excellent topic for a conference call.  NABL
will discuss organizing one soon.  Perhaps, we will do one in August.  As I
understand it,  there will be an offering of the LSAT in October?

Best,
Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Aimee
Harwood via blindlaw
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:04 AM
To: Scott C. LaBarre via blindlaw
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT

There wasn't anything in your message. :-)

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 29, 2014, at 1:01 PM, "Scott C. LaBarre via blindlaw"
<blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> This message has no content.
_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/slabarre%40labarrelaw.
com


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.
com



From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net  Wed Jul  9 06:17:40 2014
From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net)
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:17:40 -0700
Subject: [blindlaw] introduction
In-Reply-To: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY407-EAS22007F2F3872E972CE6B3A0F9030@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <8CB1F19AB6374441B231CD53AB0D735E@Spike>

Hi Dawn,
I am a blind paralegal in California. I have no idea where Madonna 
University is located but in most ABA approved or state approved paralegal 
studies programs the university will attempt to assist students in meeting 
internship or work experience requirements. There are many possibilities 
that you could consider depending on your areas of interest. Not only would 
these include attorneys in private practice and law firms they would also 
include governmental agencies such as County district attorney/prosecutor's 
or public defender/s office or state agencies such as attorney general or 
labor commissioner to name a few. In house counsel for corporations could 
also utilize your services. It is also good to network with your classmates 
to determine what they are doing for their internships. If you have a local 
paralegal association in your area they may also be of help. Contact me off 
list if needed.
Chuck Krugman, MSW Paralegal
1237 P Street
Fresno ca 93721
559-266-9237
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dawn Benbow via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2014 12:06 PM
Subject: [blindlaw] introduction


> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm a paralegal student at Madonna University, in their 4 year Paralegal 
> Bachelors program. I'm going to be a senior in the fall and graduating 
> next May. Part of my program requires an internship. I've been trying to 
> find one for the last few months with very little success. Do any of you 
> have any suggestions where I might be able to find either internships, or 
> even an entry level position as a Paralegal, which would be prefferable to 
> me.
>
> I've also thought about going to law school at some point, but am 
> undecided. Right now, my family, I'm married with two kids, needs my extra 
> income, but my professors think I would do well as an attorney.
>
> Thanks for any advice you guys can give.
>
> Dawn
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net 



From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Wed Jul  9 16:10:01 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 11:10:01 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Executive Director, LAW Advocates job announcement
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3CBB@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3CBB@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C0F1@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


POSITION:                       Executive Director

ORGANIZATION:            LAW Advocates is a non-profit organization that provides civil legal assistance to low-income individuals and families in Whatcom and Island Counties, primarily through volunteer attorneys.

RESPONSIBLE TO:         Board of Directors


DUTIES: The Executive Director is responsible for implementing the vision of the Board of Directors of LAW Advocates as laid forth in its strategic plan and directing LAW Advocates' activities in all areas including the delivery of legal services, development and finance, personnel and administration, and community relations.

Programs Administration & Development
*        Ensure LAW Advocates' services are consistent with the strategic plan.
*        Ensure programs activities are in compliance with agency policies, requirements set forth by funders, and relevant law.
*        Monitor the quality and effectiveness of services through statistical analysis and client and community partner feedback and address shortcomings, in consultation with the board as appropriate.
*        Ensure that LAW Advocates programs work collaboratively with community partners to address the myriad barriers faced by the client community.
*        Identify community service gaps in coordination with community partners.
*        Work with the Board of Directors, staff, and community partners, as appropriate, to develop and implement new programs and program policies.
*        Collaborate with partners in the Alliance for Equal Justice and the Pro Bono Council to coordinate, develop, and evaluate the delivery of legal services.
*        Supervise and support the programs manager.
*        Support the programs manager in screening and placing appropriate cases with volunteer attorneys for pro bono assistance.

Staff Management

 *   Ensure that HR and other policies are consistent with the strategic plan and in compliance with agency policies, requirements set forth by funders, and relevant law.  Provide appropriate training to staff, volunteers, and interns.
 *   Recruit, hire, train, and supervise senior staff positions, consistent with the values set forth in the strategic plan.
 *   Support the leadership development of staff to ensure the smooth transition of Executive Directors and to facilitate succession planning.
 *   Determine and delegate work assignments.  Maintain strong and open communication.
 *   Cultivate a positive work environment and a culture consistent with the values set forth in the strategic plan.
 *   Solicit ideas and input from staff.
 *   Evaluate staff performances on an annual basis, or as needed.
 *   Support and recognize staff in the performance of their work and advocate for staff to Board.

Volunteer Management

 *   Recruit, screen, orient, and support attorney volunteers.
 *   Ensure that volunteer policies are consistent with the strategic plan and in compliance with agency policies, requirements set forth by funders, and relevant law.
 *   Cultivate positive relationships with attorney volunteers, maintain open communication and solicit feedback.
 *   Maintain electronic volunteer database with contact information, interest areas, and volunteer hours.
 *   Develop and share continuing legal education opportunities and other benefits with attorney volunteers.
 *   Coordinate an annual volunteer appreciation event.
 *   Identify and carry out other opportunities for volunteer appreciation, including awards nominations and positive press.

Bar Association Relations & Continuing Legal Education (CLE)

 *   Recognizing that members of the Whatcom County Bar Association who volunteer with LAW Advocates are the "members" of the organization and a key constituency, crucial to the success of the organization and the Executive Director's effectiveness, develop and maintain good relations with the bar leaders as well as the general membership.
 *   Attend monthly bar meetings and report on LAW Advocates' activities.
 *   Communicate LAW Advocates' activities in other manners including articles in the WCBA newsletter and via email.
 *   Participate in bar activities and serve on bar committees as directed by the Board and as is consistent with the strategic plan, including the "young" lawyers group and the Whatcom chapter of Washington Women Lawyers.
 *   Staff the WCBA's CLE Committee and coordinate at least 5 CLE seminars annually, in partnership with the bar association.  Coordination includes communicating with and supporting CLE chairs and speakers, requesting credit from the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA), coordinating with the CLE facility, developing and distributing advertising materials, accepting registrations, managing the CLE finances, maintain CLE records as required by the WSBA, overseeing speaker recognition, and providing staff for CLE events.

Board Support

 *   Support the Board of Directors and its committees in all aspects of their work, including coordinating meetings and developing meeting materials.
 *   Support the Board of Directors in creating and maintaining a strategic plan and monitoring that program activities are consistent with the strategic plan.
 *   Establish and maintain positive working relations with the Board of Directors.
 *   Communicate and inform Board on agency operations, including preparation of a monthly report to be presented at the monthly board meeting.
 *   Assist the Board to assess the need for new members and engage in recruitment.
 *   Maintain the Board of Directors handbook and provide orientation to new members and the full board as requested.
 *   Coordinate Board training as requested.
 *   Communicate and inform the board on activities of the Alliance for Equal Justice, including the Campaign for Equal Justice, the Equal Justice Coalition, the Pro Bono Council, and the Access to Justice Board.
 *   Maintain board records consistent with the record retention guidelines.

Budget & Fiscal Management

 *   Draft proposed annual budget for review and approval by the Board of Directors.
 *   Monitor budget projections and cash flow throughout the year.
 *   Review and approve payment of agency expenses, sign checks, and ensure financial activities are in compliance with the board-approved financial policies.
 *   Prepare monthly financial reports for the Board of Directors.
 *   Reconcile general ledger accounts to bank and grant billing statements on a monthly basis.
 *   Work with the board treasurer and outside CPA to solve fiscal issues.
 *   Ensure prompt donor recognition.

Grant Development & Management
*        Seek out and apply for grants for existing programs consistent with the board-approved budget.
*        Analyze grants for new activities, consistent with the strategic plan, make recommendations to the board and, if approved, apply for funding.
*        Ensure that grant makers are properly acknowledged and cultivate good relations.
*        Manage acquired grants to contract specifications, including reporting obligations.
*        Create program budgets in QuickBooks (to be consistent with "classes").  Monitor program and budgets and grant expenditures to identify programs in need of fundraising, ensure grant resources do not overlap, and ensure proper expenditure of funds.
*        Prepare grant fiscal reports.

Marketing & Fundraising

 *   With the support of the Board and staff, coordinate LAW Advocates' annual dinner and auction, "Lawyers' Take Orders", including staffing the planning committee, overseeing item donations, sponsorship acquisitions, ticket sales, coordinating vendors, and recognition.
 *   Assist the Board to execute other fundraising events as directed.
 *   Assist the Board to identify funding needs, targets, and strategy, consistent with the strategic plan.  Assist the Board to execute that strategy, including the creation of fundraising materials.
 *   Assist the Board to identify marketing needs, targets, and strategy, consistent with the strategic plan.  Assist the Board to execute that strategy, including the creation of marketing materials.
 *   Serve as a spokesperson for LAW Advocates and establish and maintain the agency's desired image, as directed by Board and consistent with the strategic plan.


QUALIFICATIONS:
1.     Bachelor's degree in relevant field required.  Law degree preferred.
2.      Non-profit management experience strongly preferred.
3.      Legal experience strongly preferred.
4.      Ability to think strategically about LAW Advocates priorities and help to translate these priorities into program and staff recruitment and related fundraising activities.
5.      Ability to identify legal issues and develop positive relationships with local attorneys.
6.      Excellent computer skills.  Experience with QuickBooks preferred.
7.      Excellent organizational skills.  This includes a demonstrated ability to implement projects with a commitment to a high-quality work product and to prioritize competing tasks and thrive in a fast-paced, deadline orientated work environment.
8.      Excellent communication skills.
9.      Demonstrated ability to successfully supervise and motivate others.
10.   Excellent judgment.
11.   Demonstrated ability to work with vulnerable populations and individuals demonstrating strong emotions.
12.   Commitment to LAW Advocates' mission, vision, and values.
13.   Fluency in Spanish or Russian a plus.



SALARY:  DOE

HOURS:  40 hours/week



The position is open until filled and candidates are encouraged to apply early.  Please send your letter of interest, resume, and references to Olivia Danville, olivia at lawadvocates.org<mailto:olivia at lawadvocates.org>.






From chris.stewart at uky.edu  Wed Jul  9 18:11:07 2014
From: chris.stewart at uky.edu (Stewart, Christopher K)
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 14:11:07 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
Message-ID: <CAAyF1PDbDGmLfoJ3ofarAaQfvV1Kt3d0M3GEXsA2F0HU2nehzg@mail.gmail.com>

As I recall, the LSAC requires an absurdly early registration for
people seeking accommodations. So, the earlier the better.

Best,
Chris


On 7/9/14, blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org <blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Send blindlaw mailing list submissions to
> 	blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of blindlaw digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: LSAT (Sexton, bruce)
>    2. Re: introduction (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:44:42 -0800
> From: "Sexton, bruce" <philosopher25 at gmail.com>
> To: <slabarre at labarrelaw.com>, "'Blind Law Mailing List'"
> 	<blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT
> Message-ID: <00ba01cf9b06$98fde980$caf9bc80$@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Are you willing to set up the conference number?  I have not coordinated
> one
> in a while, so am not familiar with the conference services out there.
> Otherwise, I am happy to search around the internet for a free conference
> service and set it up.
>
> It is best that we have this call in July or early august if possible, in
> my
> opinion.
>
> Please advise,
> Bruce
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Scott C.
> LaBarre via blindlaw
> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:10 AM
> To: 'Aimee Harwood'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT
>
> Hmmm, my sent box shows text and so does my copy of my message that came
> through Blindlaw but here is my message again.  Of course, if your program
> or setting are indicating no text from me, this explanation will probably
> register as no content.
>
> I do think this would be an excellent topic for a conference call.  NABL
> will discuss organizing one soon.  Perhaps, we will do one in August.  As I
> understand it,  there will be an offering of the LSAT in October?
>
> Best,
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Aimee
> Harwood via blindlaw
> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:04 AM
> To: Scott C. LaBarre via blindlaw
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT
>
> There wasn't anything in your message. :-)
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jun 29, 2014, at 1:01 PM, "Scott C. LaBarre via blindlaw"
> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> This message has no content.
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/slabarre%40labarrelaw.
> com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.
> com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:17:40 -0700
> From: <ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "Dawn Benbow" <d-benbow at live.com>,	"Blind Law Mailing List"
> 	<blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] introduction
> Message-ID: <8CB1F19AB6374441B231CD53AB0D735E at Spike>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Hi Dawn,
> I am a blind paralegal in California. I have no idea where Madonna
> University is located but in most ABA approved or state approved paralegal
> studies programs the university will attempt to assist students in meeting
> internship or work experience requirements. There are many possibilities
> that you could consider depending on your areas of interest. Not only would
>
> these include attorneys in private practice and law firms they would also
> include governmental agencies such as County district attorney/prosecutor's
>
> or public defender/s office or state agencies such as attorney general or
> labor commissioner to name a few. In house counsel for corporations could
> also utilize your services. It is also good to network with your classmates
>
> to determine what they are doing for their internships. If you have a local
>
> paralegal association in your area they may also be of help. Contact me off
>
> list if needed.
> Chuck Krugman, MSW Paralegal
> 1237 P Street
> Fresno ca 93721
> 559-266-9237
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dawn Benbow via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2014 12:06 PM
> Subject: [blindlaw] introduction
>
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm a paralegal student at Madonna University, in their 4 year Paralegal
>> Bachelors program. I'm going to be a senior in the fall and graduating
>> next May. Part of my program requires an internship. I've been trying to
>> find one for the last few months with very little success. Do any of you
>> have any suggestions where I might be able to find either internships, or
>>
>> even an entry level position as a Paralegal, which would be prefferable to
>>
>> me.
>>
>> I've also thought about going to law school at some point, but am
>> undecided. Right now, my family, I'm married with two kids, needs my extra
>>
>> income, but my professors think I would do well as an attorney.
>>
>> Thanks for any advice you guys can give.
>>
>> Dawn
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of blindlaw Digest, Vol 122, Issue 5
> ****************************************
>


-- 
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757


From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Wed Jul  9 18:43:24 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Manners, Derek)
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 14:43:24 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PDbDGmLfoJ3ofarAaQfvV1Kt3d0M3GEXsA2F0HU2nehzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PDbDGmLfoJ3ofarAaQfvV1Kt3d0M3GEXsA2F0HU2nehzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAP4LJoMiZgpp0itpXZ_4myUsOt5aeoAZr9=dtZnp+mmTSqM0A@mail.gmail.com>

Agreed.  Sometimes you have to go to the eye doctor if has been over a
year.  I also had to get records from MIDDLE SCHOOL (UGH).  These steps can
take a while so the earlier people are made aware the better.


On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw <
blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> As I recall, the LSAC requires an absurdly early registration for
> people seeking accommodations. So, the earlier the better.
>
> Best,
> Chris
>
>
> On 7/9/14, blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org <blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org>
> wrote:
> > Send blindlaw mailing list submissions to
> >       blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >       http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >       blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >       blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of blindlaw digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >    1. Re: LSAT (Sexton, bruce)
> >    2. Re: introduction (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:44:42 -0800
> > From: "Sexton, bruce" <philosopher25 at gmail.com>
> > To: <slabarre at labarrelaw.com>, "'Blind Law Mailing List'"
> >       <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT
> > Message-ID: <00ba01cf9b06$98fde980$caf9bc80$@gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain;     charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > Hi Scott,
> >
> > Are you willing to set up the conference number?  I have not coordinated
> > one
> > in a while, so am not familiar with the conference services out there.
> > Otherwise, I am happy to search around the internet for a free conference
> > service and set it up.
> >
> > It is best that we have this call in July or early august if possible, in
> > my
> > opinion.
> >
> > Please advise,
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Scott
> C.
> > LaBarre via blindlaw
> > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:10 AM
> > To: 'Aimee Harwood'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT
> >
> > Hmmm, my sent box shows text and so does my copy of my message that came
> > through Blindlaw but here is my message again.  Of course, if your
> program
> > or setting are indicating no text from me, this explanation will probably
> > register as no content.
> >
> > I do think this would be an excellent topic for a conference call.  NABL
> > will discuss organizing one soon.  Perhaps, we will do one in August.
>  As I
> > understand it,  there will be an offering of the LSAT in October?
> >
> > Best,
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Aimee
> > Harwood via blindlaw
> > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:04 AM
> > To: Scott C. LaBarre via blindlaw
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT
> >
> > There wasn't anything in your message. :-)
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Jun 29, 2014, at 1:01 PM, "Scott C. LaBarre via blindlaw"
> > <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> This message has no content.
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> > blindlaw:
> >
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/slabarre%40labarrelaw
> .
> > com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> > blindlaw:
> >
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail
> .
> > com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:17:40 -0700
> > From: <ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
> > To: "Dawn Benbow" <d-benbow at live.com>,        "Blind Law Mailing List"
> >       <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] introduction
> > Message-ID: <8CB1F19AB6374441B231CD53AB0D735E at Spike>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> >       reply-type=original
> >
> > Hi Dawn,
> > I am a blind paralegal in California. I have no idea where Madonna
> > University is located but in most ABA approved or state approved
> paralegal
> > studies programs the university will attempt to assist students in
> meeting
> > internship or work experience requirements. There are many possibilities
> > that you could consider depending on your areas of interest. Not only
> would
> >
> > these include attorneys in private practice and law firms they would also
> > include governmental agencies such as County district
> attorney/prosecutor's
> >
> > or public defender/s office or state agencies such as attorney general or
> > labor commissioner to name a few. In house counsel for corporations could
> > also utilize your services. It is also good to network with your
> classmates
> >
> > to determine what they are doing for their internships. If you have a
> local
> >
> > paralegal association in your area they may also be of help. Contact me
> off
> >
> > list if needed.
> > Chuck Krugman, MSW Paralegal
> > 1237 P Street
> > Fresno ca 93721
> > 559-266-9237
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dawn Benbow via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> > To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2014 12:06 PM
> > Subject: [blindlaw] introduction
> >
> >
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I'm a paralegal student at Madonna University, in their 4 year Paralegal
> >> Bachelors program. I'm going to be a senior in the fall and graduating
> >> next May. Part of my program requires an internship. I've been trying to
> >> find one for the last few months with very little success. Do any of you
> >> have any suggestions where I might be able to find either internships,
> or
> >>
> >> even an entry level position as a Paralegal, which would be prefferable
> to
> >>
> >> me.
> >>
> >> I've also thought about going to law school at some point, but am
> >> undecided. Right now, my family, I'm married with two kids, needs my
> extra
> >>
> >> income, but my professors think I would do well as an attorney.
> >>
> >> Thanks for any advice you guys can give.
> >>
> >> Dawn
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> blindlaw mailing list
> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> blindlaw:
> >>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of blindlaw Digest, Vol 122, Issue 5
> > ****************************************
> >
>
>
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>

From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Wed Jul  9 23:23:54 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 18:23:54 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Access for Blind and Visually Impaired People
 Blocked By Single Largest US Healthcare Payer
In-Reply-To: <d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349a6cad34f6c.20140709222200@mail25.atl91.mcsv.net>
References: <d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349a6cad34f6c.20140709222200@mail25.atl91.mcsv.net>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C1F7@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>



From: Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund [mailto:shenderson=dredf.org at mail25.atl91.mcsv.net] On Behalf Of Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 3:23 PM
To: Nightingale, Noel
Subject: Access for Blind and Visually Impaired People Blocked By Single Largest US Healthcare Payer

Access for Blind and Visually Impaired People Blocked By Largest US Healthcare Payer

View this email in your browser<http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=bebce7a9a2&e=a6cad34f6c>




<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=b28336f36d&e=a6cad34f6c>[cid:image001.jpg at 01CF9B92.2D3544F0]<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=b28336f36d&e=a6cad34f6c><http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=b28336f36d&e=a6cad34f6c>







July 9, 2014
Access for Blind and Visually Impaired People
Blocked By Single Largest US Healthcare Payer
In brief: DREDF is conducting an investigation into the manner in which blind and visually impaired persons covered by Medicare experience problems accessing Medicare notices in alternate formats. Beneficiaries have already reported "solutions" that include relying on third parties to read their private medical information to them. These and other barriers are resulting in poor health outcomes and loss of critical benefits. Please contact Namita Gupta at DREDF, ngupta at dredf.org<mailto:ngupta at dredf.org>, or 510-644-2555 if you have experienced difficulty receiving Medicare notices in alternative formats.
Read on for details about the issue. Get informed and help us get the word out!
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), an agency of the US Department of Health and Human Services, is the largest single payer for health care in the United States, providing healthcare coverage to nearly 90 million Americans through Medicare, Medicaid, and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. According to CMS data, there are approximately 49 million Medicare beneficiaries in the United States. Approximately 4.3 million individuals over the age of 65 report some form of visual impairment. There are also approximately 700,000 Medicare beneficiaries between the ages of 21 and 64 who have some form of visual impairment.
In a 2011 report<http://dredf.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=86867903bc&e=a6cad34f6c>, the Equal Rights Center found that blind and visually impaired individuals were generally unable to obtain information regarding their health care and benefits because the information was not provided in accessible formats. This information can include, among other things, medical exam, test, and lab results, appointment reminders, information explaining benefit eligibility or termination, prescription medication with dosage information, as well as security and privacy rights, and billing and other medical records.
CMS itself regularly communicates complex information to Medicare beneficiaries through Medical Summary Notices. CMS regularly sends blind and visually impaired persons standard print correspondence about their individual benefits. Similarly, many large private managed care organizations that contract with Medicare to serve Medicare beneficiaries as Medicare Advantage and Part D plans regularly provide patients with documents such as Explanation of Benefits (EOBs) and other important benefits and billing information in standard print formats.
But these standard print formats are inaccessible to blind and visually impaired persons. CMS itself refuses to provide individual statements in formats that are accessible, such as readers, Brailled materials, audio recordings, large print formats, accessible online statements, and data CDs, regardless of individualized requests. Other Medicare managed care contractors fail to provide alternate formats beyond slightly larger print or Braille which, depending on an individual's disability, may be useless.
In the absence of alternative formats, blind and visually impaired persons are not effectively informed of and do not have an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of Medicare programs.
Instead of providing alternate formats for these critical notices and information, CMS has suggested that individuals seek the assistance of third parties to read their private medical information to them, thus requiring blind and visually impaired Medicare recipients to compromise their privacy regarding sensitive medical information.
Blind and visually impaired persons are additionally at risk of significant financial and personal hardship because they are unable to read notices regarding critical benefit eligibility or termination issues that arrive in standard print formats.
DREDF is conducting an investigation into the manner in which blind and visually impaired persons who receive Medicare are experiencing problems receiving Medicare notices in alternate formats. We want to hear your story. If you have experienced any of the above issues, please contact Namita Gupta at DREDF, ngupta at dredf.org<mailto:ngupta at dredf.org>, or 510-644-2555.
We anticipate this investigation will be ongoing for a minimum of the next several months. All communications will be kept confidential.
Thank you for sharing your experiences with us. Together, we will achieve healthcare justice for people with disabilities!






Save the Date for DREDF's 35th Anniversary Celebration: September 3, 2014<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=faf77281ce&e=a6cad34f6c>

[cid:image002.jpg at 01CF9B92.2D3544F0]



DREDF invites you to join us on Wednesday, September 3, 2014 at the ERC<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=ecbb178b83&e=a6cad34f6c> from 5:30-8:00PM, when we welcome two of our most stalwart disability rights leaders:
Senator Tom Harkin and Representative George Miller, to honor their long years of public service to our community, as well as explore with them how our movement can best advance their legacy and lessons.
Donations, tickets, and sponsorships for the 35th Anniversary event will help underwrite DREDF's legal, policy, and parent advocacy work that safeguards the economic security, safety, and dignity of children and adults with disabilities by improving access to health care, public benefits, transportation, digital and streaming video, and education. We appreciate every gift we get. Thank you! Please contact Director of Development Ingrid Tischer, itischer at dredf.org<mailto:itischer at dredf.org> or 510-644-2555 ext 5241, if you would like more information.



[cid:image003.jpg at 01CF9B92.2D3544F0]<http://dredf.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=0f48d84b24&e=a6cad34f6c>

Share<http://dredf.us2.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=57cfa13d13&e=a6cad34f6c>




[cid:image003.jpg at 01CF9B92.2D3544F0]<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=9dc0cc0fd8&e=a6cad34f6c>

Tweet<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=795f99894e&e=a6cad34f6c>




[cid:image003.jpg at 01CF9B92.2D3544F0]<http://us2.forward-to-friend1.com/forward?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=bebce7a9a2&e=a6cad34f6c>

Forward<http://us2.forward-to-friend1.com/forward?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=bebce7a9a2&e=a6cad34f6c>




[cid:image003.jpg at 01CF9B92.2D3544F0]<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=9521045be9&e=a6cad34f6c>

+1<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=c72759be93&e=a6cad34f6c>









Copyright © 2014 Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at the DREDF website.

Our mailing address is:
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
3075 Adeline St, Suite 210
Berkeley, CA 94703

Add us to your address book<http://dredf.us2.list-manage1.com/vcard?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=c15e323206>


unsubscribe from this list<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=c15e323206&e=a6cad34f6c&c=bebce7a9a2>    update subscription preferences<http://dredf.us2.list-manage.com/profile?u=d8372142072c8ce7f2e90e349&id=c15e323206&e=a6cad34f6c>






-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD000.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: ~WRD000.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140709/b96bf331/attachment-0020.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8716 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140709/b96bf331/attachment-0021.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1919 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140709/b96bf331/attachment-0022.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 338 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140709/b96bf331/attachment-0023.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 332 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140709/b96bf331/attachment-0024.jpg>

From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Thu Jul 10 16:56:33 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Manners, Derek)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:56:33 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?
Message-ID: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>

I'm applying for an externship with the Connecticut Attorney General's
Office.  I've indicated a willingness to work in certain subject matters
that interest me.  I got an email telling me to think about other areas as
well that also suit my long term goals.  It was helpful and friendly.

Today, I got a followup email, presumably after they read that I was
legally blind in my application. The email asked if I would want to do
Health Law since they had another visually impaired attorney and they
already had accommodations set up for her.

It seemed like they were indicating that if I needed accommodations that I
would be segregated with the other visually impaired attorney.  On the
other hand, she framed in the form of a question and I don't think she
meant anything by it.  I think she just meant it would be easier for me to
get settled in.

Is this a normal phenomenon?  Also, should I be annoyed by it?

Thanks
Derek Manners

From al.elia at aol.com  Thu Jul 10 17:12:05 2014
From: al.elia at aol.com (ALBERT ELIA)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:12:05 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?
In-Reply-To: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5B377037-6D0F-4CB1-98B1-145510F6F1D3@aol.com>

BAsed on the facts you've indicated, I suspect not that they wish to segregate you, but perhaps that they believe you might benefit from working with another practicing blind attorney.

In any case, I would not take offense at this point. Try calling ang see if you can suss out their reasons for suggesting health law with the blind attorney. That will also give you an opportunity to explain what accommodations, if any, you will need, as they may be very different than the blind attorney currently working there.



On Jul 10, 2014, at 12:56 PM, Manners, Derek via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> I'm applying for an externship with the Connecticut Attorney General's
> Office.  I've indicated a willingness to work in certain subject matters
> that interest me.  I got an email telling me to think about other areas as
> well that also suit my long term goals.  It was helpful and friendly.
> 
> Today, I got a followup email, presumably after they read that I was
> legally blind in my application. The email asked if I would want to do
> Health Law since they had another visually impaired attorney and they
> already had accommodations set up for her.
> 
> It seemed like they were indicating that if I needed accommodations that I
> would be segregated with the other visually impaired attorney.  On the
> other hand, she framed in the form of a question and I don't think she
> meant anything by it.  I think she just meant it would be easier for me to
> get settled in.
> 
> Is this a normal phenomenon?  Also, should I be annoyed by it?
> 
> Thanks
> Derek Manners
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/al.elia%40aol.com



From gerard.sadlier at gmail.com  Thu Jul 10 17:12:20 2014
From: gerard.sadlier at gmail.com (Gerard Sadlier)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 18:12:20 +0100
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?
In-Reply-To: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGZitzJGqtLMpOEjYQ=Ns-eR_=ic8Xdyhs-s73rChsKQDgUNVQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Derek,

I'm not US based but having dealt with law firms when interviewing
etc. here in Ireland, I really think that what you have to remember is
that most of these people have never dealt with a visually impaired
lawyer before and don't know what to expect. I think it's up to you to
give them guidance both on the accommodations you are looking for (as
I understand you have) and on issues like being sent to a Department
where another visually impaired lawyer is based, purely because they
are there.

I suspect that as you say, the lady in question meant well. She may
for example think that if (as I assume) an externship is a short term
appointment, the fact that accommodations are already set up may be
helpful because it would allow you to hit the ground running. She may
be concerned that, with the best will in the world, their might be
teething problems with accommodations and she may have concluded that
they are less likely where accommodations already exist. (To be clear,
I am not excusing an employer who fails to provide accommodations, I
am saying that in reality, teething problems do sometimes happen and
that if your externship lasts for say three months and fixing issues
takes a week or 2, you have lost part of the benefit of an externship
- this is also an important consideration if you are doing a summer
placement with a firm, with a view to being hiered as you will want to
show what you can do, not to be undermined by teething problems not of
your making.)

So I would frame my response diplomatically (as I'm sure you would in
any event) and explain either that health law is not something that
would suit you or that you would in fact be interested in doing health
law. By all means, make it clear that you don't see yourself as going
to a particular department simply because there is a visually impaired
lawyer there already, if the email made you uncomfortable. However, in
fairness, I hardly think that the presence or absence of a single
visually impaired lawyer within what sounds like a reasonably large
department amounts to your segregation?

Those are my thoughts, I would be interested in other views.

Kind regards

Ger

On 7/10/14, Manners, Derek via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> I'm applying for an externship with the Connecticut Attorney General's
> Office.  I've indicated a willingness to work in certain subject matters
> that interest me.  I got an email telling me to think about other areas as
> well that also suit my long term goals.  It was helpful and friendly.
>
> Today, I got a followup email, presumably after they read that I was
> legally blind in my application. The email asked if I would want to do
> Health Law since they had another visually impaired attorney and they
> already had accommodations set up for her.
>
> It seemed like they were indicating that if I needed accommodations that I
> would be segregated with the other visually impaired attorney.  On the
> other hand, she framed in the form of a question and I don't think she
> meant anything by it.  I think she just meant it would be easier for me to
> get settled in.
>
> Is this a normal phenomenon?  Also, should I be annoyed by it?
>
> Thanks
> Derek Manners
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com
>


From Susan.Kelly at pima.gov  Thu Jul 10 17:21:12 2014
From: Susan.Kelly at pima.gov (Susan Kelly)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:21:12 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?
In-Reply-To: <5B377037-6D0F-4CB1-98B1-145510F6F1D3@aol.com>
References: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5B377037-6D0F-4CB1-98B1-145510F6F1D3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380AF6A4@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>

It would definitely be a good idea to look into their accommodation plans for you.  When I started losing my sight, I had to take care of finding and procuring most of the accommodations myself - which, since I did not yet qualify as legally blind, seemed reasonable because neither my employer nor I thought the ADA applied.  (We were all probably wrong on that).  As it progressed, though, my agency expected to use the same style of accommodations provided by another county agency to an attorney in their office who had been blind since birth.  For obvious reasons, that was not realistic.  Fortunately, the other attorney repeatedly advised my employers that no two people work the same way or benefit from the same accommodations, that everything needs to be tweaked to work best for the individual involved.  Hopefully, the same will work out for you with another visually impaired attorney being there.

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of ALBERT ELIA via blindlaw
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 10:12 AM
To: Manners, Derek; Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?

BAsed on the facts you've indicated, I suspect not that they wish to segregate you, but perhaps that they believe you might benefit from working with another practicing blind attorney.

In any case, I would not take offense at this point. Try calling ang see if you can suss out their reasons for suggesting health law with the blind attorney. That will also give you an opportunity to explain what accommodations, if any, you will need, as they may be very different than the blind attorney currently working there.



On Jul 10, 2014, at 12:56 PM, Manners, Derek via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> I'm applying for an externship with the Connecticut Attorney General's 
> Office.  I've indicated a willingness to work in certain subject 
> matters that interest me.  I got an email telling me to think about 
> other areas as well that also suit my long term goals.  It was helpful and friendly.
> 
> Today, I got a followup email, presumably after they read that I was 
> legally blind in my application. The email asked if I would want to do 
> Health Law since they had another visually impaired attorney and they 
> already had accommodations set up for her.
> 
> It seemed like they were indicating that if I needed accommodations 
> that I would be segregated with the other visually impaired attorney.  
> On the other hand, she framed in the form of a question and I don't 
> think she meant anything by it.  I think she just meant it would be 
> easier for me to get settled in.
> 
> Is this a normal phenomenon?  Also, should I be annoyed by it?
> 
> Thanks
> Derek Manners
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/al.elia%40aol.co
> m


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/susan.kelly%40pima.gov


From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Thu Jul 10 18:20:45 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:20:45 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Assistant United States Attorney,
 United States Attorney's Office,
 Western District of Washington job announcement
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EC4@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EC4@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C304@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


Link:
http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-united-states-attorney-29

Text:
Assistant United States Attorney
Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA)<http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/>
United States Attorney's Office, Western District of Washington
Attorney
Seattle or Tacoma, WA 98101
United States
14-WDWA-AUSA-04 (Term, Criminal)
About the Office:

The United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Western District of Washington is responsible for representing the federal government in virtually all litigation involving the United States in the Western District of Washington (WDWA). This includes criminal prosecutions for violations of federal law, civil lawsuits by and against the government, and actions to collect judgments and restitution on behalf of victims and taxpayers. WDWA has approximately 72 Assistant United States Attorneys (AUSAs). The USAO is divided into two litigating Divisions (Criminal and Civil). The USAO's main office is in Seattle, Washington, with a branch office located in Tacoma, Washington.
Job Description:

This is a TERM position not-to-exceed 14 months, subject to availability of funds. This position may be extended, or made permanent, without further advertising.

The 14-month, term position will be located in the Criminal Division of the Western District of Washington. The attorney hired for this position will be assigned a variety of criminal matters involving various areas of criminal law.

AUSAs in the Criminal Division prosecute federal criminal cases in the Western District of Washington. AUSAs in the Criminal Division advise federal law enforcement agents on criminal investigation, present criminal cases to the grand jury, try criminal cases before the

United States District Court, and represent the United States in criminal appeals before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Qualifications:

The applicants must possess a J.D. Degree, be an active member of the bar (any jurisdiction), and have at least three years post-J.D. experience. Ideal qualifications include at least five years of post-J.D. litigation experience.

Applicants must demonstrate a quick analytical ability and an ability to synthesize a work range of data, help direct an investigation and have the ability to accurately and precisely articulate the critical issues in a case. Applicants must demonstrate superior oral and writing skills, strong research and interpersonal skills, and good judgment. Applicants must possess excellent communication and courtroom skills, and exhibit the ability to work in a supportive and professional manner with other attorneys, support staff and client agencies. Applicants must have a demonstrated capacity to function, with minimal guidance, in a highly demanding environment and in the highest ethical manner.

Applicants will be expected to do their own legal research and writing and will be substantially self-sufficient in preparing day-to-day correspondence and pleadings. Applicants also must demonstrate excellent computer literacy skills to include experience with automated research on the Internet, electronic court filing, and electronic e-mail and word processing systems.
Salary:
Assistant United States Attorneys' pay is administratively determined based, in part, on the number of years of professional attorney experience. The range of pay with locality is $54,847 to $145,166.
Travel:
Occasional travel within and outside the District will be required.
Application Process:

Applications will be accepted through July 3, 2014. Interested persons must email in pdf format: (a) a cover letter referencing Vacancy Announcement: 14-WDWA-AUSA-04 (Criminal-Term) addressed as set forth below, (b) a detailed resume, and (c) a writing sample that meets the requirements set forth below, to:
USAWAW.Hiring at usdoj.gov<mailto:USAWAW.Hiring at usdoj.gov>
Email links icon

Jenny A. Durkan
United States Attorney
Attention: Annette L. Hayes
First Assistant United States Attorney
700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220
Seattle, Washington 98101

No telephone calls please.

Writing Sample: Include a sample of your legal writing, such as a portion or all of an appellate brief, memorandum of points and authorities, or opinion letter. The writing sample should be a recent example of your work and demonstrate your ability to analyze legal issues and present that analysis in written form. The sample should be predominantly your own work. If the document was edited by others, include a cover memo that briefly describes the level of editing that occurred.
Application Deadline:
Thursday, July 3, 2014
Relocation Expenses:
Relocation expenses are not authorized.
Practice Area:
Criminal Law
Number of Positions:
1

* * *

Department Policies

Equal Employment Opportunity: The U.S. Department of Justice is an Equal Opportunity/Reasonable Accommodation Employer. Except where otherwise provided by law, there will be no discrimination because of color, race, religion, national origin, political affiliation, marital status, disability (physical or mental), age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, genetic information, status as a parent, membership or non-membership in an employee organization, on the basis of personal favoritism, or any other non-merit factor. The Department of Justice welcomes and encourages applications from persons with physical and mental disabilities. The Department is firmly committed to satisfying its affirmative obligations under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to ensure that persons with disabilities have every opportunity to be hired and advanced on the basis of merit within the Department of Justice.

Reasonable Accommodations: This agency provides reasonable accommodation to applicants with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation for any part of the application and hiring process, please notify the agency. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

Outreach and Recruitment for Qualified Applicants with Disabilities: The Department encourages qualified applicants with disabilities, including individuals with targeted/severe disabilities to apply in response to posted vacancy announcements. Qualified applicants with targeted/severe disabilities may be eligible for direct hire, non-competitive appointment under Schedule A (5 C.F.R. § 213.3102(u)) hiring authority. Individuals with targeted/severe disabilities are encouraged to register for the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Shared List of People with Disabilities (the Bender Disability Employment Registry) by submitting their resume to resume at benderconsult.com<mailto:resume at benderconsult.com>
Email links icon
and referencing "Federal Career Opportunities" in the subject line. Additional information about the Bender Registry is available at www.benderconsult.com [external link]<http://www.benderconsult.com>. Individuals with disabilities may also contact one of the Department's Disability Points of Contact (DPOC). See list of DPOCs<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/disability-points-contact>.

Suitability and Citizenship: It is the policy of the Department to achieve a drug-free workplace and persons selected for employment will be required to pass a drug test which screens for illegal drug use prior to final appointment. Employment is also contingent upon the completion and satisfactory adjudication of a background investigation. Only U.S. citizens are eligible for employment with the Executive Office for Immigration Review and the United States Attorneys' Offices. Unless otherwise indicated in a particular job advertisement, non-U.S. Citizens may apply for employment with other organizations, but should be advised that appointments of non-U.S. Citizens are extremely rare; such appointments would be possible only if necessary to accomplish the Department's mission and would be subject to strict security requirements. Applicants who hold dual citizenship in the U.S. and another country will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Veterans: There is no formal rating system for applying veterans' preference to attorney appointments in the excepted service; however, the Department of Justice considers veterans' preference eligibility as a positive factor in attorney hiring. Applicants eligible for veterans' preference must include that information in their cover letter or resume and attach supporting documentation (e.g., the DD 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty and other supporting documentation) to their submissions. Although the "point" system is not used, per se, applicants eligible to claim 10-point preference must submit Standard Form (SF) 15, Application for 10-Point Veteran Preference, and submit the supporting documentation required for the specific type of preference claimed (visit the OPM website, www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/SF15.pdf <http://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/SF15.pdf> for a copy of SF 15, which lists the types of 10-point preferences and the required supporting document(s). Applicants should note that SF 15 requires supporting documentation associated with service- connected disabilities or receipt of nonservice-connected disability pensions to be dated 1991 or later except in the case of service members submitting official statements or retirement orders from a branch of the Armed Forces showing that his or her retirement was due to a permanent service-connected disability or that he/she was transferred to the permanent disability retired list (the statement or retirement orders must indicate that the disability is 10% or more).

* * *

This and other vacancy announcements can be found under Attorney Vacancies<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/attorneys-vacancies> and Volunteer Legal Internships<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/volunteer-internship-opportunities>. The Department of Justice cannot control further dissemination and/or posting of information contained in this vacancy announcement. Such posting and/or dissemination is not an endorsement by the Department of the organization or group disseminating and/or posting the information.


From ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com  Thu Jul 10 18:32:33 2014
From: ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com (Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc.)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:32:33 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?
References: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <91AF12F5BBC34E839F6E4BEC9C2A6DF1@victory2>

Dear Mr. Manners:

The choice as to whether or not to take offence is truly yours!  If I were 
in your shoes, I'll interpret that which I have been offered as a FOOT IN 
THE DOOR that could lead to other possibilities hitherto unexplored.  Also, 
you could bring in a breath of fresh air to the department and help initiate 
or resolve issues of reasonable accommodations across several platforms in 
the attorney general's office.  Happy haunting!!

Sincerely,
Olusegun
Denver, Colorado 


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com



From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Thu Jul 10 18:51:00 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:51:00 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Blind Students and Health Professions, Inside Higher ED,
 June 30 2014
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EE5@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EE5@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C32B@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


Link:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/06/30/iowa-supreme-court-says-chiropractic-college-discriminated-against-blind-student#sthash.PTpKENGU.M59eVX9L.dpbs

Text:
Blind Students and Health Professions
June 30, 2014
By Scott Jaschik

The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday ruled 5 to 2 that a chiropractic college violated the rights of a blind student by denying him the use of a sighted reader to describe X-rays to him. The student, blind from birth, was unable to stay in the program when his request was rejected, and the Iowa court's decision may represent a shift in how courts consider the issue of health professions students with certain disabilities.

The ideas in the decision, if embraced elsewhere, could lead to more options in health professions programs for students who are deaf or blind. The Iowa court found that a health professions college cannot simply assert that seeing an X-ray or patient is the only way a chiropractor or student could make a diagnosis. And the court ruled that it is relevant that there are blind medical doctors and medical students, suggesting that there are ways that blind students can meet academic requirements that in most cases may require vision.

The Iowa court also rejected the approach of the Ohio Supreme Court in 1996 ruling upholding the right of Case Western Reserve University to reject a blind applicant to its medical school.

And the Iowa court offered a new emphasis on a 1979 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the right of Southeastern Community College, in North Carolina, to reject a deaf applicant to a nursing program. The Iowa court said some parts of the nursing case in fact suggest a higher bar than has been assumed for colleges to meet in denying accommodations to students with disabilities.

L. Scott Lissner, Americans With Disabilities Act coordinator at Ohio State University and president of the Association on Higher Education And Disability, said via email that while the ruling will apply only in Iowa, the issues in the case extend broadly to health professions programs.

"I think health professions are conservative when it comes to risk," Lissner said. "Because of their clinical focus they have a tendency to treat all requirements and standards as a patient safety issue whether it is or not and are slow to accept different ways of accomplishing tasks (the essence of accommodation) until others have proven it."

While the Iowa ruling will likely be hailed by advocates for students with disabilities, the dissent in the case shows that many people (and judges) remain sympathetic to idea that health professions colleges should have the right to say that vision is a basic requirement. The dissent states that the opinion in the case "elevates political correctness over common sense."

The dissent asks: "What is next? Are we going to require the Federal Aviation Administration to hire blind air traffic controllers, relying on assistants to tell them what is appearing on the screen?"

The ruling is about Aaron Cannon, who enrolled at Palmer College of Chiropractic, although he was warned that there might be some portions of his education that he could not complete due to his blindness. The decision says that Cannon believed he could work something out, and that he succeeded in much of the coursework required by the college.

The conflict came when he was required to take radiology and Palmer rejected his request that a sighted reader be used to describe X-rays so he could demonstrate his ability to diagnose based on X-rays. The college said that its academic judgment was that its students needed vision to view X-rays themselves. Palmer is not unique in having the view that vision is a basic requirement for a medical professional; the technical admissions requirements of medical schools at such institutions as the University of Pennsylvania and the University of California at Los Angeles (among many others) specifically state that candidates for admission must have good vision.

The Iowa opinion, however, found that Palmer was engaged in discrimination (as defined by the federal Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act) in not considering whether Cannon could function without being able to see the X-rays himself. The court faulted Palmer for not considering alternatives to its traditional requirements and asked how the college, having apparently granted waivers to some blind students in the past, could now insist that it could not do so.

And the court cited Palmer's acknowledgment that about 20 percent of practicing chiropractors don't have X-ray technology in their offices, but rely on others to make X-rays. This suggests, the opinion said, that what matters to a chiropractor is getting information from an X-ray in some way, not being fully involved in the process itself.

The U.S. Supreme Court's 1979 decision, the Iowa court said, certainly established the idea that a college could demonstrate that certain requested changes from students with disabilities would be unreasonable to approve. But the Iowa court noted parts of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that may give more hope to students like Cannon. The U.S. Supreme Court said that changes in technology and practice could well make it possible for students with disabilities in subsequent cases to be able to meet academic requirements that couldn't have been achieved in 1979. The U.S. Supreme Court said that it could "envision situations" in the future "where an insistence on continuing past requirements and practices" could deny an education to "genuinely qualified" people. It is this part of the decision, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled, that was relevant to Cannon's case.

The press office for Palmer did not respond to a request for comment.

The Iowa dissent argued, however, that the court should have followed the model of its counterpart in Ohio when it considered a blind applicant to the Case Western medical school. That court specifically cited reading X-rays as one of the tasks a blind person could not do, and affirmed the right of the Case Western faculty to define that as a requirement.

A "misinterpreted X-ray could lead to improper treatment and lifelong paralysis," the dissent said. "X-ray interpretation requires training and skilled judgment to reach correct conclusions based on shades and shadows of complex bony structures. That is why many physicians with 20-20 vision choose to outsource interpretation of X-rays to radiologists. It is ludicrous to override Palmer's academic decision and require it to permit a blind person to interpret X-rays for patient treatment based on what someone else claims he or she is seeing."

The dissent added that the opinion intrudes on academic decision-making. Said the dissent: "The majority's intrusion into academic judgment on professional health care standards is unprecedented. No other court in the country has forced an academic institution to allow a blind student to interpret X-rays relying on an untrained sighted assistant."

Lissner of Ohio State said he didn't know if the ideas in the Iowa ruling would take hold. But he said that, given all the disability issues raised by the case, it would be "a wonderful teaching tool."

From gerard.sadlier at gmail.com  Thu Jul 10 19:08:15 2014
From: gerard.sadlier at gmail.com (Gerard Sadlier)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 20:08:15 +0100
Subject: [blindlaw] Blind Students and Health Professions,
 Inside Higher ED, June 30 2014
In-Reply-To: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C32B@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EE5@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
	<04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C32B@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <CAGZitzJot5sRZsbAXWESDNAq8_p7i79wBCWBdLbcFc5gQUjNDA@mail.gmail.com>

Could someone please circulate a link to the judgment?

Thanks

Ger

On 7/10/14, Nightingale, Noel via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>
> Link:
> http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/06/30/iowa-supreme-court-says-chiropractic-college-discriminated-against-blind-student#sthash.PTpKENGU.M59eVX9L.dpbs
>
> Text:
> Blind Students and Health Professions
> June 30, 2014
> By Scott Jaschik
>
> The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday ruled 5 to 2 that a chiropractic college
> violated the rights of a blind student by denying him the use of a sighted
> reader to describe X-rays to him. The student, blind from birth, was unable
> to stay in the program when his request was rejected, and the Iowa court's
> decision may represent a shift in how courts consider the issue of health
> professions students with certain disabilities.
>
> The ideas in the decision, if embraced elsewhere, could lead to more options
> in health professions programs for students who are deaf or blind. The Iowa
> court found that a health professions college cannot simply assert that
> seeing an X-ray or patient is the only way a chiropractor or student could
> make a diagnosis. And the court ruled that it is relevant that there are
> blind medical doctors and medical students, suggesting that there are ways
> that blind students can meet academic requirements that in most cases may
> require vision.
>
> The Iowa court also rejected the approach of the Ohio Supreme Court in 1996
> ruling upholding the right of Case Western Reserve University to reject a
> blind applicant to its medical school.
>
> And the Iowa court offered a new emphasis on a 1979 decision by the U.S.
> Supreme Court that upheld the right of Southeastern Community College, in
> North Carolina, to reject a deaf applicant to a nursing program. The Iowa
> court said some parts of the nursing case in fact suggest a higher bar than
> has been assumed for colleges to meet in denying accommodations to students
> with disabilities.
>
> L. Scott Lissner, Americans With Disabilities Act coordinator at Ohio State
> University and president of the Association on Higher Education And
> Disability, said via email that while the ruling will apply only in Iowa,
> the issues in the case extend broadly to health professions programs.
>
> "I think health professions are conservative when it comes to risk," Lissner
> said. "Because of their clinical focus they have a tendency to treat all
> requirements and standards as a patient safety issue whether it is or not
> and are slow to accept different ways of accomplishing tasks (the essence of
> accommodation) until others have proven it."
>
> While the Iowa ruling will likely be hailed by advocates for students with
> disabilities, the dissent in the case shows that many people (and judges)
> remain sympathetic to idea that health professions colleges should have the
> right to say that vision is a basic requirement. The dissent states that the
> opinion in the case "elevates political correctness over common sense."
>
> The dissent asks: "What is next? Are we going to require the Federal
> Aviation Administration to hire blind air traffic controllers, relying on
> assistants to tell them what is appearing on the screen?"
>
> The ruling is about Aaron Cannon, who enrolled at Palmer College of
> Chiropractic, although he was warned that there might be some portions of
> his education that he could not complete due to his blindness. The decision
> says that Cannon believed he could work something out, and that he succeeded
> in much of the coursework required by the college.
>
> The conflict came when he was required to take radiology and Palmer rejected
> his request that a sighted reader be used to describe X-rays so he could
> demonstrate his ability to diagnose based on X-rays. The college said that
> its academic judgment was that its students needed vision to view X-rays
> themselves. Palmer is not unique in having the view that vision is a basic
> requirement for a medical professional; the technical admissions
> requirements of medical schools at such institutions as the University of
> Pennsylvania and the University of California at Los Angeles (among many
> others) specifically state that candidates for admission must have good
> vision.
>
> The Iowa opinion, however, found that Palmer was engaged in discrimination
> (as defined by the federal Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with
> Disabilities Act) in not considering whether Cannon could function without
> being able to see the X-rays himself. The court faulted Palmer for not
> considering alternatives to its traditional requirements and asked how the
> college, having apparently granted waivers to some blind students in the
> past, could now insist that it could not do so.
>
> And the court cited Palmer's acknowledgment that about 20 percent of
> practicing chiropractors don't have X-ray technology in their offices, but
> rely on others to make X-rays. This suggests, the opinion said, that what
> matters to a chiropractor is getting information from an X-ray in some way,
> not being fully involved in the process itself.
>
> The U.S. Supreme Court's 1979 decision, the Iowa court said, certainly
> established the idea that a college could demonstrate that certain requested
> changes from students with disabilities would be unreasonable to approve.
> But the Iowa court noted parts of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that may
> give more hope to students like Cannon. The U.S. Supreme Court said that
> changes in technology and practice could well make it possible for students
> with disabilities in subsequent cases to be able to meet academic
> requirements that couldn't have been achieved in 1979. The U.S. Supreme
> Court said that it could "envision situations" in the future "where an
> insistence on continuing past requirements and practices" could deny an
> education to "genuinely qualified" people. It is this part of the decision,
> the Iowa Supreme Court ruled, that was relevant to Cannon's case.
>
> The press office for Palmer did not respond to a request for comment.
>
> The Iowa dissent argued, however, that the court should have followed the
> model of its counterpart in Ohio when it considered a blind applicant to the
> Case Western medical school. That court specifically cited reading X-rays as
> one of the tasks a blind person could not do, and affirmed the right of the
> Case Western faculty to define that as a requirement.
>
> A "misinterpreted X-ray could lead to improper treatment and lifelong
> paralysis," the dissent said. "X-ray interpretation requires training and
> skilled judgment to reach correct conclusions based on shades and shadows of
> complex bony structures. That is why many physicians with 20-20 vision
> choose to outsource interpretation of X-rays to radiologists. It is
> ludicrous to override Palmer's academic decision and require it to permit a
> blind person to interpret X-rays for patient treatment based on what someone
> else claims he or she is seeing."
>
> The dissent added that the opinion intrudes on academic decision-making.
> Said the dissent: "The majority's intrusion into academic judgment on
> professional health care standards is unprecedented. No other court in the
> country has forced an academic institution to allow a blind student to
> interpret X-rays relying on an untrained sighted assistant."
>
> Lissner of Ohio State said he didn't know if the ideas in the Iowa ruling
> would take hold. But he said that, given all the disability issues raised by
> the case, it would be "a wonderful teaching tool."
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com
>


From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Thu Jul 10 21:55:03 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:55:03 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] =?utf-8?q?City_of_Seattle=E2=80=99s_Municipal_Court=2C?=
 =?utf-8?q?_Chief_Clerk/Director_of_Judicial_Operations_job_announcement?=
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EC2@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A91E3EC2@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C289C397@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


City of Seattle’s Municipal Court
Chief Clerk/Director of Judicial Operations
ABOUT THE CANDIDATE THE IDEAL CANDIDATE Seattle Municipal Court seeks an experienced leader who:  Has highly developed skills in assisting elected officials and judicial agencies to reach consensus by addressing occasional opposing opinions and ideas.  Is politically astute and demonstrates an unquestionable sense of integrity, honesty, and professionalism.  Has experience developing policy and legislation.  Is very adept at case flow management.  Has experience with change management, drives high performance, and fosters a strong team environment.  Is regarded as a forward-thinking and dynamic leader who understands the inter-workings of municipal government.  Has a Master’s in Public Administration or Management and is an Institute for Court Management Fellow. Chief Clerk/Director of Judicial Operations City of Seattle’s Municipal Court ABOUT THE POSITION Under the direction of the Court Administrator, the highlights of the position’s responsibilities include:  Direct operations of three units: Court Services, Records Management, and Jury Services.  Oversee 40 plus staff, recruitment, performance reviews, discipline, training, and 4.7 million budget.  Maintain and develop improved case flow and calendaring methods in collaboration with the bench.  Participate in policy development related to new courtroom programs or operational initiatives.  Propose, interpret, and analyze legislation and rule changes.  Promote effective and positive partnerships with judicial officers, prosecuting and defense attorneys, other justice agencies, City, County, and State departments.  Ensure staff compliance with state laws, ordinances, rules, and procedures adopted by the Court.  Serve as Acting Court Administrator. The minimum qualifications for this Director position include:  Bachelor’s degree in public administration, business management, or other relevant field of study.  Minimum of five years of progressively responsible experience with policy development, supervision/ management of staff, human resources management, and technology. SMC63014 THE SELECTION PROCESS THE COMPENSATION The salary range is $86,200 to $129,200 annually. The City offers a variety of outstanding benefits including:  Medical, Dental, and Vision Plans  City-paid Basic Life Insurance  ORCA Transit Passport  City-matched Retirement  Deferred Compensation  Post-Retirement Medical  Flexible Spending Accounts  Generous Paid Time Off ABOUT THE COURT www.seattle.gov/courts<http://www.seattle.gov/courts> ● Seattle Municipal Court ● 600 Fifth Ave ● P.O. Box 34987 ● Seattle, WA ● 98124-4987 Questions, please contact Kristy Hulverson, Sr. Personnel Specialist at 206-233-7201 Submit your cover letter and resume by 4:00 PM on Tuesday—July 22, 2014 to Sr. Personnel Specialist, Kristy Hulverson at kristy.hulverson at seattle.gov<mailto:kristy.hulverson at seattle.gov>.  In your 1-2 page cover letter, in addition to explaining your qualifications, please address how you have: 1) Managed and motivated represented/nonrepresented staff, 2) Led/participated in a technology improvement team, and 3) Experience with developing and presenting complex and detailed information to public officials.  The selection process will include two interview rounds, technical assessments, and the top candidate participating in a background investigation. NOTE: This at-will position is currently under review and the title may change. The Municipal Court of Seattle is one of the highest volume Courts of Limited Jurisdiction in the state. The Honorable C. Kimi Kondo serves as the Presiding Judge over 12 judicial officers and 200 plus staff. The Court adjudicates all misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor crimes, infractions, and civil violations authorized under the Seattle Municipal Code and certain Revised Code of Washington Statutes. During 2013, the Court processed approximately 675,000 infractions and approximately 10,000 criminal filings. Recently the Court migrated to electronic viewing of documents. The next phase involves re-engineering business processes and creating electronic document management systems.

From jdg.gardner2009 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 10 22:42:28 2014
From: jdg.gardner2009 at gmail.com (John Gardner)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:42:28 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
Message-ID: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>

For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and or
what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The reason
I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.

Thanks
John Gardner

From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Thu Jul 10 22:48:52 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Derek Manners)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 18:48:52 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
In-Reply-To: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DF617788-F7B1-4C92-997F-9AA42521D85A@jd16.law.harvard.edu>

Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If you get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and so you only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade). 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and or
> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The reason
> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
> 
> Thanks
> John Gardner
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu


From gerard.sadlier at gmail.com  Fri Jul 11 00:15:55 2014
From: gerard.sadlier at gmail.com (Gerard Sadlier)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 01:15:55 +0100
Subject: [blindlaw] Urgent: Has Anyone used Eclipse eDiscovery Product with
	JAWS?
Message-ID: <CAGZitzL08qHDOA5NMmzFDpwk=tb60Mw_kAJHoMGrHbOaVKsAZg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I wonder if any of you have used Eclipse, an eDiscovery platform,
using a screen reader - preferably JAWS.

If so, was it accessible and do you have any tips on its use?

Ger

On 7/10/14, Derek Manners via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If you
> get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and so you
> only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade).
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw
>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and
>> or
>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The
>> reason
>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>>
>> Thanks
>> John Gardner
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com
>


From mnowicki4 at icloud.com  Fri Jul 11 11:05:47 2014
From: mnowicki4 at icloud.com (Michael Nowicki)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 13:05:47 +0200
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
In-Reply-To: <DF617788-F7B1-4C92-997F-9AA42521D85A@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
References: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<DF617788-F7B1-4C92-997F-9AA42521D85A@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <C7A20F5A-8C5A-4379-B58A-7CB8FCF100B8@icloud.com>

I requested doubletime an electronic format with jaws. I also asked for permission to use Excel for logic games. I got all of these accommodations.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 11, 2014, at 12:48 AM, Derek Manners via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If you get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and so you only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade). 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and or
>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The reason
>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> John Gardner
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mnowicki4%40icloud.com


From chris.stewart at uky.edu  Fri Jul 11 15:32:53 2014
From: chris.stewart at uky.edu (Stewart, Christopher K)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:32:53 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be Offended
Message-ID: <CAAyF1PBPs_xFugihTzY8kWo3bWW6BrrdX02m++gsyC0K0ABu9g@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Derrick,

First of all, congratulations on taking the chance to get some
experience before your first year of law school.

I would not be offended. Personally, I would have loved the option of
working with a visually impaired before starting law school. I
wouldn't even try calling to attempt sussing out the reasons. The
reasons are completely clear. It was a thoughtful question, and I
would advise that, at this point, the experience working with a
practicing visually impaired attorney would be better than any actual
experience you may get, particularly considering you don't have any
actual legal experience at this point.

One thing you'll learn when you start law school is that legal
analysis, and particularly legal writing, is an entirely new animal.
Being blind, however, is something you've already got experience with,
and you've got a fantastic opportunity ahead of you.

Best,
Chris

-- 
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757


From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Fri Jul 11 15:54:46 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Derek Manners)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:54:46 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be Offended
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PBPs_xFugihTzY8kWo3bWW6BrrdX02m++gsyC0K0ABu9g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBPs_xFugihTzY8kWo3bWW6BrrdX02m++gsyC0K0ABu9g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2E646CBA-18B7-4825-843B-5843A4C79739@jd16.law.harvard.edu>

Point of fact, I've finished my first year at harvard law school and am entering my second year. I've also worked all summer at the Department of Defense, Office of the General Counsel. But still I think your general point is fair. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 11, 2014, at 11:32 AM, "Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello Derrick,
> 
> First of all, congratulations on taking the chance to get some
> experience before your first year of law school.
> 
> I would not be offended. Personally, I would have loved the option of
> working with a visually impaired before starting law school. I
> wouldn't even try calling to attempt sussing out the reasons. The
> reasons are completely clear. It was a thoughtful question, and I
> would advise that, at this point, the experience working with a
> practicing visually impaired attorney would be better than any actual
> experience you may get, particularly considering you don't have any
> actual legal experience at this point.
> 
> One thing you'll learn when you start law school is that legal
> analysis, and particularly legal writing, is an entirely new animal.
> Being blind, however, is something you've already got experience with,
> and you've got a fantastic opportunity ahead of you.
> 
> Best,
> Chris
> 
> -- 
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
> Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu


From gerard.sadlier at gmail.com  Fri Jul 11 16:30:22 2014
From: gerard.sadlier at gmail.com (Gerard Sadlier)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 17:30:22 +0100
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be Offended
In-Reply-To: <2E646CBA-18B7-4825-843B-5843A4C79739@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
References: <CAAyF1PBPs_xFugihTzY8kWo3bWW6BrrdX02m++gsyC0K0ABu9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<2E646CBA-18B7-4825-843B-5843A4C79739@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <CAGZitzJJht=r6oXm1-OScJqJAsLeRizv_bG364iZM1=3GhoHLw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Derek,

Without taking away from Christopher's point, I also think it would
not be a good idea to work exclusively with another blind lawyer.
Rather, you should get exposure to working with both blind and sighted
colleagues, to see how both work. I suspect that is what would happen,
if you joined the health law section, which as noted in my previous
email sounds like a department, not a 1 person outfit.

G

On 7/11/14, Derek Manners via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Point of fact, I've finished my first year at harvard law school and am
> entering my second year. I've also worked all summer at the Department of
> Defense, Office of the General Counsel. But still I think your general point
> is fair.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 11, 2014, at 11:32 AM, "Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw"
>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Derrick,
>>
>> First of all, congratulations on taking the chance to get some
>> experience before your first year of law school.
>>
>> I would not be offended. Personally, I would have loved the option of
>> working with a visually impaired before starting law school. I
>> wouldn't even try calling to attempt sussing out the reasons. The
>> reasons are completely clear. It was a thoughtful question, and I
>> would advise that, at this point, the experience working with a
>> practicing visually impaired attorney would be better than any actual
>> experience you may get, particularly considering you don't have any
>> actual legal experience at this point.
>>
>> One thing you'll learn when you start law school is that legal
>> analysis, and particularly legal writing, is an entirely new animal.
>> Being blind, however, is something you've already got experience with,
>> and you've got a fantastic opportunity ahead of you.
>>
>> Best,
>> Chris
>>
>> --
>> Chris K. Stewart
>> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
>> Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
>> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
>> Ph:
>> (502)457-1757
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com
>


From angie.matney at gmail.com  Fri Jul 11 16:58:59 2014
From: angie.matney at gmail.com (Angie Matney)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 12:58:59 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Should I be offended?
In-Reply-To: <91AF12F5BBC34E839F6E4BEC9C2A6DF1@victory2>
References: <CAAP4LJoD8PXVCYntFAcQ1ptqZnTca7JWpZkkaDLfn7YQ6YK_jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<91AF12F5BBC34E839F6E4BEC9C2A6DF1@victory2>
Message-ID: <CAN4Q-EqbHJK1EPqfEaGthoC0285JPFJiJbcnG8adzjKWhnt+gA@mail.gmail.com>

I would have been offended if they'd said, "Hey, we wantyou to do
health law because we have this other attorney ..." But it sounds like
they were just assessing your interest in working in that field and
presenting you with an opportunity you might not have considered. If
I'd received a similar message from a potential employer regarding,
oh, say, family law, I would have thanked them but informed them that
this was not an area of interest for me. I might have asked about the
possibility of contacting this other blind attorney, because making a
contact like that could be valuable for several reasons. I wouldn't
have been offended, but again, if I felt they were actively trying to
make me work in a particular field (whether of interest to me or not)
because of the presence of another blind attorney...well, that's
different.

Angie



On 7/10/14, Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc. via blindlaw
<blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Dear Mr. Manners:
>
> The choice as to whether or not to take offence is truly yours!  If I were
> in your shoes, I'll interpret that which I have been offered as a FOOT IN
> THE DOOR that could lead to other possibilities hitherto unexplored.  Also,
>
> you could bring in a breath of fresh air to the department and help initiate
>
> or resolve issues of reasonable accommodations across several platforms in
> the attorney general's office.  Happy haunting!!
>
> Sincerely,
> Olusegun
> Denver, Colorado
>
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/angie.matney%40gmail.com
>


From dlmlaw at sbcglobal.net  Fri Jul 11 17:07:03 2014
From: dlmlaw at sbcglobal.net (Daniel McBride)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 12:07:03 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] ten most expensive discrimination suits of 2013
Message-ID: <00ca01cf9d2a$8a504f60$9ef0ee20$@sbcglobal.net>

List mates & Colleagues:

 

I thought you might find the article below interesting.  Of course, it is
obviously lacking a discrimination suit involving blind persons.  At least
the hearing impaired made the list.

 

I am uncertain what the moral of this story is.  It would seem that, if you
wish to succeed in a suit alleging some form of discrimination, you best be
a sighted person who is female and belonging to a racial class other than
Caucasian.

 

I found #5 the most interesting entry.

 

Daniel McBride

Attorney at Law

Fort Worth

 

>From Inside Counsel Magazine

Article by Chris DiMarcoJuly 8, 2014

 

Privately initiated discrimination lawsuits are not uncommon in the United
States, and while they were down year-over-year, the number of filings in
2013 was still significant and costly for businesses.  According to Seyferth
Shaw LLP's
<http://www.workplaceclassaction.com/2014/01/its-here-the-2014-workplace-cla
ss-action-litigation-report/> 2014 Workplace Class Action Litigation Report
there were 12,311 discrimination class action lawsuits filed in 2013,
dipping from 14,260 in 2012. As a result of the astronomical costs and
potential bad press associated with litigation, many of these cases were
settled out of court. And in 2013, the cost of the 10 most expensive
settlements totaled over $638 million. With money like that on the line, the
roster is a great indicator of what companies will want to ensure their
policies prevent against. Let's see how that breaks out.

 

*1. $160 million - McReynolds, et al. v. Merrill Lynch & Co.

The largest settlement of 2013 has its roots eight years earlier, when in
2005, broker George McReynolds accused Merrill Lynch & Co. of giving white
brokers more lucrative accounts while denying black employees equal pay and
career advancement opportunities. McReynolds filed a lawsuit on behalf of
700 black brokers who worked for Merrill. Before the suit was settled out of
court in August, it had seen two appeals in the Supreme Court and survived
Merrill Lynch's acquisition by Bank of America in 2009.

2. $39 million - Calibuso, et al. v. Bank Of America

In 2010 a group of female advisors lead by Judy Calibuso at the newly
acquired Merrill Lynch unit of Bank of America (BoA) filed suit for what
they alleged was systematic discrimination. The plaintiff's contended that
policies and practices at their workplaces were designed to pass over women
for business opportunities and advancements. In addition to the money paid
to the class, BoA was also ordered to have its programs reviewed by an
independent consultant for three years. The settlement was finalized in
December.

 

3. $8 million - Ellis, et al. v. Costco Wholesale Corp.

A testament to the length of time it can take for a class action lawsuit to
work itself from certification to resolution, Costco's big settlement case
last year took over a decade to complete. An initial complaint about the way
Costco selected potential managers and allegedly discouraged females from
applying was filed in 2002, the actual suit was filed in 2004, and the class
was not certified until September 2012. In December, the settlement, which
was intended for those who had been affected by the alleged discriminatory
practices was finalized. Costco also promised to reform its internal hiring
process.

4. $7.5 million - Cogdell, et al. v. The Wet Seal Inc

Following an
<http://www.insidecounsel.com/2014/06/26/eeoc-has-its-eye-on-unconscious-bia
ses-against-wom> Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigation in
2012, which found evidence that executive management had sought to maintain
the "the Armani look" (code for blonde and blue-eyed) for its store, the
company quickly opted to settle in the class action discrimination case.
The lawsuit alleged that the company had gone out of its way to fire black
store managers in an attempt to maintain that image. The company called the
settlement a "no fault resolution" but promised to evaluate it position as a
result.

 

5. $6 million - Carr, et al. v. City Of Los Angeles

Following a dispute with his wife in 2002, Phillip Carr, a Los Angeles
police officer, was
<http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7234071992382942545&hl=en&as_sd
t=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr> suspended on domestic violence charges. Carr's
wife was also employed by the city of Los Angeles, which Carr contends
impacted the punishment he received following the incident. Carr alleged
that the way the case was handled deprived him of his constitutional rights
of cross-examination and confrontation. He also argued the punishment was
time-barred.  In April of 2013, he settled with the city.

6. $4.5 million - Hubbard, et al. v. U.S. Postal Service

Disability
<http://www.insidecounsel.com/2014/06/27/labor-employment-digest-july-2014>
discrimination is a growing area of litigation risk, and perhaps as a sign
of the times this case revolved around the accommodations afforded to deaf
and hard-of-hearing workers of the United States Postal Service. The suit
alleged that workers with hearing problems were not provided with
technologies and services that would have helped them perform their duties,
and that they were frequently subject to scrutiny from other workers at the
postal service. The case was settled in July of 2013

 

7.  $3.7 million - Vasich, et al. v. City Of Chicago

Firefighters need to be physically fit to do their jobs, however this
lawsuit alleged that the test was designed more as an opportunity for the
Chicago Fire Department to discourage potential female firefighters rather
than find new recruits. The suit alleged that the test discriminated against
women and was unlawful because it was not related to job performance or
predictive of who would succeed as a firefighter. The city settled with the
class in December after two years in court.

8.  $3.1 million - Easterling, et al. v. State Of Connecticut, Department Of
Correction

Similar to the Chicago case, this suit alleged that the physical fitness
test composed of a 1.5 mile run required by the Connecticut Department of
Corrections was not a business need, and that it discriminated against
female candidates. As a result over 200 women who applied for a Correction
Officer position in 2004 through 2006, were certified for the class. The
settlement was finalized in July.

 

9. $1.3 million - Monroe, et al. v. City Of New York

Another
<http://www.insidecounsel.com/2014/06/17/muslim-job-applicants-apparently-ex
perience-more-d> lawsuit involving allegations of sexual discrimination
against a fire department, in 2006 five ranking female officers alleged that
they had been passed over for advancement because they were women. Settled
in June, the women alleged that despite their outstanding service records
they lost promotions to other less qualified candidates that were men. They
also accused the Fire Department of New York of posting jobs where they were
not widely available for internal candidates to see, discouraging
application.

10. $1 million - Bradley v. City Of Richmond

Brought by eight African-American pipe fitters employed by the City of
Richmond, Va., this suit contended that the public utilities department had
categorically discriminated, harassed and retaliated against the workers.
An investigation by the human resources department released five months
later confirmed the employees had been subject to open use of racial
epithets by white employees and supervisors, as well as favoritism toward
whites in hiring and promotion. 

 


From william_t_miller at hotmail.com  Sat Jul 12 18:23:56 2014
From: william_t_miller at hotmail.com (Will Miller)
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:23:56 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Robert's Rules of Order
Message-ID: <BAY174-DS4FCB3C9B0BC99A503B41CD3080@phx.gbl>

Hello list,
Can anyone recommend an accessible, screenreader friendly copy of Robert's Rules of Order? Something on the Web would be great, or a document edited for screenreader access. Many thanks,
Will

From philosopher25 at gmail.com  Sat Jul 12 23:05:06 2014
From: philosopher25 at gmail.com (philosopher25 at gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 15:05:06 -0800
Subject: [blindlaw] Robert's Rules of Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY174-DS4FCB3C9B0BC99A503B41CD3080@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY174-DS4FCB3C9B0BC99A503B41CD3080@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <253E088B-5B70-47A4-8472-CC30A58F5720@gmail.com>

Bookshare has one.  not the full version, but something like cliff notes. 

hth, Bruce
 
> On Jul 12, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Will Miller via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello list,
> Can anyone recommend an accessible, screenreader friendly copy of Robert's Rules of Order? Something on the Web would be great, or a document edited for screenreader access. Many thanks,
> Will
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.com


From awildheir at gmail.com  Sun Jul 13 21:16:00 2014
From: awildheir at gmail.com (Aimee Harwood)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 17:16:00 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
In-Reply-To: <DF617788-F7B1-4C92-997F-9AA42521D85A@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
References: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<DF617788-F7B1-4C92-997F-9AA42521D85A@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <23914BC7-ECAB-42F6-AFAA-14D2B7D28811@gmail.com>

So Derek is only taking the 4 sections a good or bad thing? Do they not grade the experimental? What exactly would be in the experimental section? Might be a silly question but I haven't looked at what the experimental section is.

Aimee.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Derek Manners via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If you get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and so you only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade). 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and or
>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The reason
>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> John Gardner
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com


From joltingjacksandefur at gmail.com  Sun Jul 13 21:40:31 2014
From: joltingjacksandefur at gmail.com (RJ Sandefur)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 17:40:31 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
References: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com><DF617788-F7B1-4C92-997F-9AA42521D85A@jd16.law.harvard.edu>
	<23914BC7-ECAB-42F6-AFAA-14D2B7D28811@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <38EC0DF160B64E0883BC6F17E9036A52@robert9999b7cf>

Aimee, What type of law do you want to practice? RJ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aimee Harwood via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
To: "Derek Manners" <dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu>; "Blind Law Mailing 
List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accommodations


> So Derek is only taking the 4 sections a good or bad thing? Do they not 
> grade the experimental? What exactly would be in the experimental section? 
> Might be a silly question but I haven't looked at what the experimental 
> section is.
>
> Aimee.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Derek Manners via blindlaw 
>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If 
>> you get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and 
>> so you only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade).
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw 
>>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and 
>>> or
>>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The 
>>> reason
>>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> John Gardner
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joltingjacksandefur%40gmail.com 



From awildheir at gmail.com  Sun Jul 13 22:26:15 2014
From: awildheir at gmail.com (Aimee Harwood)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 18:26:15 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
In-Reply-To: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <88C61EBA-B1B7-4E2A-9786-28DA67F07DDC@gmail.com>

Here is something I have considered but am not sure if it would be approved or not. I would like to use the electronic exam but be able to bring my braille display to use during the test.

Aimee

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and or
> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The reason
> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
> 
> Thanks
> John Gardner
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com


From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Sun Jul 13 22:35:01 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Derek Manners)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 18:35:01 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Accommodations
In-Reply-To: <88C61EBA-B1B7-4E2A-9786-28DA67F07DDC@gmail.com>
References: <CAGJqSihfBn0Z_RWTWy95LiRZHxF+R_G7htTkumuifmBKVLbb-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<88C61EBA-B1B7-4E2A-9786-28DA67F07DDC@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <94A68D45-0063-4454-8E70-19495216930B@jd16.law.harvard.edu>

No idea if that'll I work or not. LSAC is very skeptical of giving too much. Who knows if they'll approve it or not. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 13, 2014, at 6:26 PM, Aimee Harwood via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Here is something I have considered but am not sure if it would be approved or not. I would like to use the electronic exam but be able to bring my braille display to use during the test.
> 
> Aimee
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and or
>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The reason
>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> John Gardner
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu


From theweird1 at mediacombb.net  Mon Jul 14 15:23:16 2014
From: theweird1 at mediacombb.net (Loren Wakefield)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:23:16 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] examsoft
Message-ID: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>

Have any of you hd to use examsoft?  If so, how accessable is it?  And where
can one obtain the least expensive version of it?  

 

Loren 

 

 


From taiablas at gmail.com  Mon Jul 14 15:29:56 2014
From: taiablas at gmail.com (Tai Blas)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:29:56 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] examsoft
In-Reply-To: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>
References: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>
Message-ID: <1790E983-415A-43A9-8E85-B86968C8D507@gmail.com>

When I looked into using ExamSoft during my first year of law school in 2011, my understanding was that it was not accessible with JAWS at all. My school allows me to type my answers in MS Word. 

Tai Tomasi
J.D. Candidate, class of 2014
Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.

> On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Loren Wakefield via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Have any of you hd to use examsoft?  If so, how accessable is it?  And where
> can one obtain the least expensive version of it?  
> 
> 
> 
> Loren 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com

From sy.hoekstra at gmail.com  Mon Jul 14 16:32:37 2014
From: sy.hoekstra at gmail.com (Sybren Hoekstra)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:32:37 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] examsoft
In-Reply-To: <1790E983-415A-43A9-8E85-B86968C8D507@gmail.com>
References: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>
	<1790E983-415A-43A9-8E85-B86968C8D507@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D929D830-156A-435E-AC1B-EBA1E88E1857@gmail.com>

ditto. i think the whole point of those exam programs is that they stop you from opening any other programs while they are running. so they would shut down screen readers. i just avoided them and got ms word as an accommodation at both law schools i attended. but i dont actually know for a fact that screen readers are incompatible. the disability services offices i worked with just didnt even bother trying that route.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 14, 2014, at 11:29, Tai Blas via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> When I looked into using ExamSoft during my first year of law school in 2011, my understanding was that it was not accessible with JAWS at all. My school allows me to type my answers in MS Word. 
> 
> Tai Tomasi
> J.D. Candidate, class of 2014
> Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
> Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.
> 
>> On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Loren Wakefield via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Have any of you hd to use examsoft?  If so, how accessable is it?  And where
>> can one obtain the least expensive version of it?  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Loren 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sy.hoekstra%40gmail.com


From al.elia at aol.com  Mon Jul 14 16:35:28 2014
From: al.elia at aol.com (Al Elia)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:35:28 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] examsoft
In-Reply-To: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>
References: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>
Message-ID: <53E840D3-7634-448D-B09C-0181324D0835@aol.com>

Exam soft is not accessible. I spoke directly to an exam soft technical support person within the past 30 days, and he confirmed that exam soft is underlined still on
Not accessible.

Best,

Al, who is brusquer than usual because he's typing on an iPhone.

> On Jul 14, 2014, at 11:23 AM, Loren Wakefield via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Have any of you hd to use examsoft?  If so, how accessable is it?  And where
> can one obtain the least expensive version of it?  
> 
> 
> 
> Loren 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/al.elia%40aol.com


From billreif at ameritech.net  Mon Jul 14 18:04:02 2014
From: billreif at ameritech.net (Bill Reif)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:04:02 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Robert's Rules of Order
In-Reply-To: <253E088B-5B70-47A4-8472-CC30A58F5720@gmail.com>
References: <BAY174-DS4FCB3C9B0BC99A503B41CD3080@phx.gbl>
	<253E088B-5B70-47A4-8472-CC30A58F5720@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53C41B92.8010404@ameritech.net>

There is a good online resource available at the following link:
www.rulesonline.com/start.html#rror--00.htm

Cordially,
Bill


On 7/12/2014 6:05 PM, philosopher25--- via blindlaw wrote:
> Bookshare has one.  not the full version, but something like cliff notes.
>
> hth, Bruce
>   
>> On Jul 12, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Will Miller via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello list,
>> Can anyone recommend an accessible, screenreader friendly copy of Robert's Rules of Order? Something on the Web would be great, or a document edited for screenreader access. Many thanks,
>> Will
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/billreif%40ameritech.net
>



From nijat1989 at gmail.com  Mon Jul 14 20:23:34 2014
From: nijat1989 at gmail.com (Nijat Worley)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:23:34 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] blindlaw Digest, Vol 122, Issue 10
In-Reply-To: <mailman.28.1405339203.29993.blindlaw_nfbnet.org@nfbnet.org>
References: <mailman.28.1405339203.29993.blindlaw_nfbnet.org@nfbnet.org>
Message-ID: <CAKUobR5SefpG8OEhPj-nNGyGC45WXEmq3D1YhF+zxYk6vT4-jw@mail.gmail.com>

Amy,
   I took the test back in February. I requested to have the Logical
Reasoning section of the test in Braille format. At first LSAC refused
to give me the logical reasoning section in Braille, but then they
changed their mind after they understood that they would be breaking
the law. They might let you use a Braille Display, but you would have
to prove that your Braille Display is not connected to the internet.
Alternatively, they will give you a hard copy of that one section in
braille. You can also ask for other accommodations such as double
time,, and the ability to use some kind of a tool for the logical
reasoning section such as Excel spreadsheet on a computer or a game
board.

   Good luck,
   Nijat


On 7/14/14, blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org <blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Send blindlaw mailing list submissions to
> 	blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of blindlaw digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Accommodations (Aimee Harwood)
>    2. Re: Accommodations (RJ Sandefur)
>    3. Re: Accommodations (Aimee Harwood)
>    4. Re: Accommodations (Derek Manners)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 17:16:00 -0400
> From: Aimee Harwood <awildheir at gmail.com>
> To: Derek Manners <dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu>,	Blind Law Mailing
> 	List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accommodations
> Message-ID: <23914BC7-ECAB-42F6-AFAA-14D2B7D28811 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
> So Derek is only taking the 4 sections a good or bad thing? Do they not
> grade the experimental? What exactly would be in the experimental section?
> Might be a silly question but I haven't looked at what the experimental
> section is.
>
> Aimee.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Derek Manners via blindlaw
>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If
>> you get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and
>> so you only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade).
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw
>>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and
>>> or
>>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The
>>> reason
>>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> John Gardner
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 17:40:31 -0400
> From: "RJ Sandefur" <joltingjacksandefur at gmail.com>
> To: "Aimee Harwood" <awildheir at gmail.com>,	"Blind Law Mailing List"
> 	<blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accommodations
> Message-ID: <38EC0DF160B64E0883BC6F17E9036A52 at robert9999b7cf>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Aimee, What type of law do you want to practice? RJ
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aimee Harwood via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> To: "Derek Manners" <dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu>; "Blind Law Mailing
> List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 5:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accommodations
>
>
>> So Derek is only taking the 4 sections a good or bad thing? Do they not
>> grade the experimental? What exactly would be in the experimental section?
>>
>> Might be a silly question but I haven't looked at what the experimental
>> section is.
>>
>> Aimee.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Derek Manners via blindlaw
>>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Time and a half, large print, alternative location to take the test. (If
>>>
>>> you get extra time, they don't make you take the experimental section and
>>>
>>> so you only take the 4 sections that count toward your grade).
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw
>>>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The
>>>> reason
>>>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>>>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> John Gardner
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindlaw:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joltingjacksandefur%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 18:26:15 -0400
> From: Aimee Harwood <awildheir at gmail.com>
> To: John Gardner <jdg.gardner2009 at gmail.com>,	Blind Law Mailing List
> 	<blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accommodations
> Message-ID: <88C61EBA-B1B7-4E2A-9786-28DA67F07DDC at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
> Here is something I have considered but am not sure if it would be approved
> or not. I would like to use the electronic exam but be able to bring my
> braille display to use during the test.
>
> Aimee
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw
>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and
>> or
>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The
>> reason
>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>>
>> Thanks
>> John Gardner
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 18:35:01 -0400
> From: Derek Manners <dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu>
> To: Aimee Harwood <awildheir at gmail.com>,	Blind Law Mailing List
> 	<blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accommodations
> Message-ID:
> 	<94A68D45-0063-4454-8E70-19495216930B at jd16.law.harvard.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
> No idea if that'll I work or not. LSAC is very skeptical of giving too much.
> Who knows if they'll approve it or not.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 13, 2014, at 6:26 PM, Aimee Harwood via blindlaw
>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> Here is something I have considered but am not sure if it would be
>> approved or not. I would like to use the electronic exam but be able to
>> bring my braille display to use during the test.
>>
>> Aimee
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:42 PM, John Gardner via blindlaw
>>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> For those of you that took the LSAT what accommodations did you use, and
>>> or
>>> what can you use? Please let me know what you guys chose to use. The
>>> reason
>>> I am asking is because I will take the LSAT in September. Please let me
>>> know any suggestions that you guys have for taking the LSAT.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> John Gardner
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of blindlaw Digest, Vol 122, Issue 10
> *****************************************
>


-- 
The National Federation of the Blind knows that blindness is not the
characteristic that defines you or your future. Every day we raise the
expectations of blind people, because low expectations create
obstacles between blind people and our dreams. You can have the life
you want; blindness is not what holds you back.
Help me reach my fundraising goal by making a donation to the
Imagination Fund at
https://app.mobilecause.com/public/social/9717.

Vehicle Donations
Take the Blind Further
Donate your car to the
National Federation of the Blind today!
For more information, please visit: www.carshelpingtheblind.org
or call 1-855-659-931


From theweird1 at mediacombb.net  Mon Jul 14 21:13:48 2014
From: theweird1 at mediacombb.net (Loren Wakefield)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:13:48 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] examsoft
In-Reply-To: <53E840D3-7634-448D-B09C-0181324D0835@aol.com>
References: <000801cf9f77$890451c0$9b0cf540$@mediacombb.net>
	<53E840D3-7634-448D-B09C-0181324D0835@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002701cf9fa8$812ebe00$838c3a00$@mediacombb.net>

Thanks.  I appreciate the info. 

Loren 



-----Original Message-----
From: Al Elia [mailto:al.elia at aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 11:35 AM
To: Loren Wakefield; Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] examsoft

Exam soft is not accessible. I spoke directly to an exam soft technical
support person within the past 30 days, and he confirmed that exam soft is
underlined still on Not accessible.

Best,

Al, who is brusquer than usual because he's typing on an iPhone.

> On Jul 14, 2014, at 11:23 AM, Loren Wakefield via blindlaw
<blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Have any of you hd to use examsoft?  If so, how accessable is it?  And 
> where can one obtain the least expensive version of it?
> 
> 
> 
> Loren
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/al.elia%40aol.com



From davant1958 at gmail.com  Tue Jul 15 21:24:44 2014
From: davant1958 at gmail.com (Denise Avant)
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:24:44 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Fwd: Fall 2014 Legal Internship Opportunity - ACLUF
	Equality Center,
	Disability Rights Program San Francisco & NY - Please Post and
	Forward
References: <BE9157E2135ACA439766E655BACFE7AA01982B9C@EXCH-MB-02.aba.ad.abanet.org>
Message-ID: <827189CC-A2A0-4DE4-8FFF-8F152F892FEC@gmail.com>



Denise R. avant
1st Vice President
National Federation of the Blind of Illinois
Live the life you want
Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Stratton, Michael" <Michael.Stratton at AMERICANBAR.ORG>
> Date: July 15, 2014 at 2:22:10 PM CDT
> To: 3D at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG
> Subject: FW: Fall 2014 Legal Internship Opportunity - ACLUF Equality Center, Disability Rights Program San Francisco & NY -  Please Post and Forward
> Reply-To: "The Disability Discussion Docket (3D)"              <3D at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG>, "Stratton, Michael" <Michael.Stratton at AMERICANBAR.ORG>
> 
> FYI
> 
> From: Chloe Wykstra [mailto:hrintern2 at aclu.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:21 PM
> To: ABA Commission on Disbility Rights
> Subject: Fall 2014 Legal Internship Opportunity - ACLUF Equality Center, Disability Rights Program San Francisco & NY - Please Post and Forward
>  
> 
> July 15, 2014
>  
>  
> FALL 2014 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY
> American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
> Equality Center, Disability Rights Program, San Francisco & NY
>  
> For nearly 100 years, the ACLU has been our nation’s guardian of liberty, working in courts, legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and the laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.  Whether it’s achieving full equality for the LGBT community, establishing new privacy protections for our digital age, ending mass incarceration, or preserving the right to vote or the right to have an abortion, the ACLU takes up the toughest civil liberties cases and issues to defend all people from government abuse and overreach. With more than a million members, activists, and supporters, the ACLU is a nationwide organization that fights tirelessly in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and Washington, D.C., for the principle that every individual’s rights must be protected equally under the law, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability or national origin.
>  
> The Equality Center – Disability Rights Program of the ACLU’s National Office in New York City and San Francisco seeks applicants for Fall 2014 Legal Internships, starting in September. A stipend is available for those students who do not receive outside funding and/or course credit. Arrangements can be made with educational institutions for work/study or course credit.
>  
> OVERVIEW
>  
> The ACLU has a long history of defending the rights of people with disabilities. It played a major role in securing passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, has battled discrimination against persons with HIV/AIDS, and stood up for the voting rights of persons with disabilities in the ongoing debate over electoral reform. It has fought to obtain adequate health care and access to services for prisoners with disabilities across the country and is now addressing fundamental civil rights issues in education, voting, criminal justice, and guardianship. 
>  
>  
> INTERNSHIP OVERVIEW
> 
> The internship requires a 10-16 week commitment with a preferred start date of September 2, 2014. The internship can be full-time, or part-time with weekly hours that are negotiable.
> ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES
> Our legal internship program is designed to provide legal interns with the opportunity to learn about public interest law, with a disability rights focus. Interns will work closely with the Equality Center – Disability Counsel.   Legal interns will gain experience by:
> ·         Providing legal research, analysis, and writing.
> ·         Conducting Internet and other factual research and collaborating with staff in preparing background memoranda on selected policy issues.
> ·         Collecting and analyzing statistical and social science data for use in litigation and policy presentations.
> ·         Supporting outreach to disability organizations.
> ·         Supporting the development and maintenance of website materials and other public information outlets.
> ·         Working on special projects and other duties as assigned.
> 
> DESIRED EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS
>  
> The internship is open to students, who are currently enrolled in law school, who have completed their first semester, and who possess the following:
> Excellent research, writing and communications skills.
> ·         Proficiency in Microsoft Office Suite, including Internet research.
> ·         Ability to work independently.
> ·         Experience with disability rights law, legislative lobbying, and personal experience with disability preferred.
> ·         Demonstrated commitment to civil rights and civil liberties issues. 
> 
> HOW TO APPLY
>  
> Please send a letter of interest describing your interest in disability rights and civil liberties, including any relevant life or work experience gained before or during law school; a resume; a writing sample (less than five pages); and the names and phone numbers of two references to hrjobsCE at aclu.org - It is imperative that you reference [2014 Fall Legal Internship-Equality Center/ACLU-INCL44] in the subject line. Please specify your desired office location in the cover letter. If you are interested in both offices, please apply separately to each and indicate that you have done so in your cover letter. This email address is specific to Equality Center – Disability Rights Unit postings. In order to ensure your application is received, please make certain it is sent to the correct e-mail address.
>  
> Alternatively, applications can be mailed to:
>  
> American Civil Liberties Union
> RE: [2014 Fall Legal Internship-Equality Center/ACLU-INCL44]
> 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
> New York, NY 10004
>  
> Please indicate in your cover letter where you learned of this internship opportunity.
> Applications will be accepted until the internship is filled. Students are encouraged to apply soon.
>  
> This posting provides a general but not comprehensive list of the opportunities of the internship.  It does not represent a contract of employment. The ACLU reserves the right to change the posting at any time without advance notice.
> The ACLU is an equal opportunity employer.  We value a diverse workforce and an inclusive culture. The ACLU encourages applications from all qualified individuals without regard to race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, national origin, marital status, citizenship, disability, and veteran status. 
> The ACLU undertakes affirmative action strategies in its recruitment and employment efforts to ensure that persons with disabilities have full opportunities for employment in all positions.
> We encourage applicants with disabilities who may need accommodations in the application process to contact: HRJobsINCLReq at aclu.org. Correspondence sent to this address that is not related to requests for accommodations will not be reviewed.  Applicants should follow the instructions above regarding how to apply.
> The ACLU comprises two separate corporate entities, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation. Both the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation are national organizations with the same overall mission, and share office space and employees. The ACLU has two separate corporate entities in order to do a broad range of work to protect civil liberties. This job posting refers collectively to the two organizations under the name “ACLU.”
>  
> Michael J. Stratton
> Administrative Coordinator
> Commission on Disability Rights (CDR) - Mail Stop 11.0
> American Bar Association (ABA)
> 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400
> Washington, DC 20036-5303
>  
> T: 202-662-1571
> F: 202-442-3439
> michael.stratton at americanbar.org  
> http://www.americanbar.org/disability 
>  

From george.opie at juno.com  Wed Jul 16 12:02:15 2014
From: george.opie at juno.com (george.opie at juno.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 05:02:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [blindlaw] Juno Auto Response. Re: blindlaw Digest, Vol 122,
	Issue 12
Message-ID: <AABK6N4QHAXUWAGJ@maildeliver03.vgs.untd.com>

I'm not available right now.  I will get back to you when possible.


From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Wed Jul 16 15:20:05 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 10:20:05 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Opportunities for graduating law students now
 available through Honors Program in the Office of the Solicitor at the US
 Labor Department
In-Reply-To: <ef58c36907594ef5914866097fbbff53@BN1PR09MB108.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
References: <a873c10e8ff8420c846320a2774a0224@BY2PR09MB0261.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<7b0b0a8bffe141408c057040da9327cc@BY2PR09MB0293.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<c03df9b9ea794ddda5acf448da7f6e07@BL2PR09MB0163.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<191d3ca1301841878b9ada775e4812f7@BY2PR09MB0214.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<ef58c36907594ef5914866097fbbff53@BN1PR09MB108.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971C01@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>



From: fangseattle at googlegroups.com [mailto:fangseattle at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Daquiz, Abigail - SOL
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 1:07 PM
To: fangseattle at googlegroups.com
Subject: [fangs] Opportunities for graduating law students now available through Honors Program in the Office of the Solicitor at the US Labor Department





[cid:image005.jpg at 01CFA0CE.BFB96860]News Release


Connect with DOL at http://social.dol.gov<http://social.dol.gov/>!


[cid:image019.png at 01CF9F73.8ED31F90]<http://twitter.com/usdol>


[cid:image020.jpg at 01CF9F73.8ED31F90]<http://www.facebook.com/departmentoflabor>


[cid:image021.jpg at 01CF9F73.8ED31F90]<http://www.youtube.com/usdepartmentoflabor>


[cid:image022.jpg at 01CF9F73.8ED31F90]<http://social.dol.gov/blog>


[cid:image023.jpg at 01CF9F73.8ED31F90]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/52862363 at N07/>




U.S. Department of Labor           For Immediate Release      July 14, 2014
Office of Public Affairs                                                        Contact:  Egan Reich
Washington, D.C.                                                                  Phone:     202-693-4960
Release Number:  14-1294-NAT                                           Email:     reich.egan at dol.gov<mailto:reich.egan at dol.gov>

Opportunities for graduating law students now available through
Honors Program in the Office of the Solicitor at the US Labor Department

[cid:image008.png at 01CFA0CE.BFB96860]WASHINGTON - The application period for the fall 2015 Honors Program<http://1.usa.gov/U5KWBW> in the Office of the Solicitor<http://1.usa.gov/1niRGrG> at the U.S. Department of Labor is underway. The program provides challenging professional opportunities for outstanding law school graduates with a passion for public service. The approximately 550 attorneys in the Department of Labor's solicitor's office enforce and interpret labor standards, occupational<http://1.usa.gov/1hB8gQn> and mine safety and health laws<http://1.usa.gov/QD8VGT>, civil rights laws<http://1.usa.gov/1zsmNpP>, pension and health benefit laws<http://1.usa.gov/1aSNCoS>, and more<http://1.usa.gov/1oKV51T> on behalf of workers.

"The Solicitor of Labor's Honors Program is a truly exceptional opportunity for the very best of the best," said U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez. "You can put your skills to work quickly and make a huge difference."

[cid:image009.png at 01CFA0CE.BFB96860]<http://1.usa.gov/U5KWBW>Honors Program attorneys work in the solicitor's office either at the department's headquarters in Washington, D.C., or in one of its regional offices, gaining exposure to a broad range of substantive legal work in one of the government's preeminent legal offices. Upon completion of the two-year program, Honors Program attorneys may continue their careers in public service in one of the solicitor's national or regional offices.

The department currently plans to hire approximately 10 attorneys to begin the Honors Program in the fall of 2015. Applicants must graduate from law school in spring or summer of 2015 or finish a fellowship or judicial clerkship in time to start the Honors Program in September 2015. Selection is highly competitive and candidates will be considered based on academic achievement, writing skills, law review or moot court experience, clinic or extracurricular activities, as well as demonstrated interest in government service or public interest law.

To find out more about the program and submit an application, please visit http://www.dol.gov/sol/honorsprogram/<http://1.usa.gov/U5KWBW>. Applications must be received by 11:59 p.m. EDT on Oct. 10, 2014.

# # #


U.S. Department of Labor news materials are accessible at http://www.dol.gov<http://1.usa.gov/1bujUtx>. The department's Reasonable Accommodation Resource Center<http://1.usa.gov/1qcx9FQ> converts departmental information and documents into alternative formats, which include Braille and large print. For alternative format requests, please contact the department at (202) 693-7828 (voice) or (800) 877-8339 (federal relay).
--
--
You received this message because you are a federal agency attorney and subscribed to the FANGS group.

To SEND A MESSAGE to this group, email to fangseattle at googlegroups.com<mailto:fangseattle at googlegroups.com>.

To UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, email fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fangseattle?hl=en

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Federal Attorneys Networking Group of Seattle" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 27564 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0028.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image016.png
Type: image/png
Size: 112137 bytes
Desc: image016.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0029.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image019.png
Type: image/png
Size: 852 bytes
Desc: image019.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0030.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image020.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 825 bytes
Desc: image020.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0020.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image021.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 924 bytes
Desc: image021.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0021.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image022.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 830 bytes
Desc: image022.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0022.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image023.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 796 bytes
Desc: image023.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0023.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image024.png
Type: image/png
Size: 160 bytes
Desc: image024.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0031.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.emz
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 401384 bytes
Desc: image003.emz
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0008.a>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2827 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0024.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.png
Type: image/png
Size: 290 bytes
Desc: image006.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0032.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.emz
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 401384 bytes
Desc: image007.emz
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0009.a>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.png
Type: image/png
Size: 160193 bytes
Desc: image008.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0033.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.png
Type: image/png
Size: 160136 bytes
Desc: image009.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140716/b4dc3f30/attachment-0034.png>

From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Wed Jul 16 19:57:15 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:57:15 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: DOJ Jobs
In-Reply-To: <a619b2e1afe54e9f9267bbcd987d4260@BN1PR07MB310.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <87EAD4112E1ABA49BCA9055BEA384CBF1EFC8F10@DPRC-EXCH-P05.JCONMAIL.doj.gov>
	<a619b2e1afe54e9f9267bbcd987d4260@BN1PR07MB310.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971D11@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>



From: Jobs [mailto:jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Maurer, Patricia via Jobs
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:49 AM
To: jobs at nfbnet.org
Subject: [Jobs] FW: DOJ Jobs



From: Special Programs Vacancies [mailto:CRT.SpecProgVacancies at usdoj.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 2:32 PM
Subject: DOJ Jobs

The Civil Rights Division (Division) would like to thank each of you for participating in our efforts to increase outreach to individuals interested in working for the Division.  The Division hopes to attract a broad and diverse pool of qualified applicants, and, to that end, encourages you to forward this information to any qualified applicants, including qualified applicants with disabilities, who may be interested in working for the Division.

For your convenience, all current Division job announcements that are open to the public are listed below.  Please also remind members of your organization that all job announcements can always be found on the Division's homepage, http://www.justice.gov/crt/employment.  In addition, if you know of other organizations that might want to receive our job announcements, please let them know the process is very simple.  They just need to send an email to CRT.SpecProgVacancies at usdoj.gov<mailto:CRT.SpecProgVacancies at usdoj.gov>.  There are no elaborate forms to fill out - just an email indicating that the organization wishes to receive future job listings and the e-mail address for us to contact them.  Please do not hesitate to let us know if you have suggestions on how we can improve our outreach efforts.

The chart below includes the Civil Rights Division job opportunities currently available to the public.

Remarks

Position

Salary

Closing Date

    NEW

Paralegal Specialist (MPP)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/374996300>
Office of Special Counsel

GS-950-11 ($63,091 to $82,019 per year)

7/21/14

    NEW

Paralegal Specialist (DEU)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/374995900>
Office of Special Counsel

GS-950-11 ($63,091 to $82,019 per year)

7/21/14



Paralegal Specialist (MPP)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/372128200>
Federal Coordination & Compliance Section

GS-950-11 ($63,091 to $82,019 per year)

7/16/14



Paralegal Specialist (DEU)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/372128500>
Federal Coordination & Compliance Section

GS-950-11 ($63,091 to $82,019 per year)

7/16/14


Student Volunteers (Division-wide)<http://www.justice.gov/crt/employment/vol_intern_opps.php>

N/A (Volunteer)

See Description


Individuals interested in applying for these positions should comply with the application procedures and closing dates in the vacancy announcement.  The Division does not accept unsolicited resumes or applications (i.e., those not submitted in response to a particular vacancy announcement).  If you need more information about a specific Civil Rights Division vacancy, please call the Human Resources Office, Team 1 on (202) 514-3934.

-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Jobs mailing list
Jobs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/jobs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Jobs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/jobs_nfbnet.org/noel.nightingale%40ed.gov

From davant1958 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 17 22:49:04 2014
From: davant1958 at gmail.com (Denise Avant)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 17:49:04 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] {Disarmed} Fwd: Justice Department Reaches Agreement
	with Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal
	Access to Court Records for Blind Individuals
References: <BE9157E2135ACA439766E655BACFE7AA01982E34@EXCH-MB-02.aba.ad.abanet.org>
Message-ID: <C8D25CA5-4E36-4FDB-A3C6-674CB683BB45@gmail.com>



Denise R. avant
1st Vice President
National Federation of the Blind of Illinois
Live the life you want
Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Stratton, Michael" <Michael.Stratton at AMERICANBAR.ORG>
> Date: July 17, 2014 at 3:02:43 PM CDT
> To: 3D at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG
> Subject: FW: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records for Blind Individuals
> Reply-To: "The Disability Discussion Docket (3D)"              <3D at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG>, "Stratton, Michael" <Michael.Stratton at AMERICANBAR.ORG>
> 
> FYI
>  
> Michael J. Stratton
> Administrative Coordinator
> Commission on Disability Rights (CDR) - Mail Stop 11.0
> American Bar Association (ABA)
> 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400
> Washington, DC 20036-5303
>  
> T: 202-662-1571
> F: 202-442-3439
> michael.stratton at americanbar.org  
> http://www.americanbar.org/disability 
>  
>  
> From: U.S. Department of Justice [mailto:usdoj at public.govdelivery.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:16 PM
> Subject: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records for Blind Individuals
>  
> The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement with the Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to remedy violations of the ADA. The settlement resolves allegations that the Clerk of Courts failed to provide a blind attorney with electronic court documents in an accessible format, despite repeated requests.  Under the settlement agreement, the Orange County Clerk of Courts will provide individuals with disabilities with any document in the official court record in an accessible format upon request, and ensure that the Clerk of Courts' website is accessible to individuals with disabilities, including blind individuals, in accordance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA, available at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/. 
> 
> To find out more about this settlement or the ADA, call the Justice Department's toll-free ADA information line at 800-514-0301 or 800-514-0383 (TDD), or access its ADA website at www.ada.gov.  
> 
>   Follow The Department of Justice on Twitter. |     Like The Department of Justice on Facebook.
> You have received this e-mail because you have asked to be notified of changes to the U.S. Department of Justice website. GovDelivery is providing this service on behalf of the Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW · Washington, DC 20530 · 202-514-2000 and may not use your subscription information for any other purposes.
>  | Department of Justice Privacy Policy  | GovDelivery Privacy Policy
> 
>  
>  
> 

From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Fri Jul 18 17:18:42 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:18:42 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange
 County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records
 for Blind Individuals
In-Reply-To: <17116007.744@public.govdelivery.com>
References: <17116007.744@public.govdelivery.com>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971F60@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>



From: U.S. Department of Justice [mailto:usdoj at public.govdelivery.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 11:16 AM
To: Nightingale, Noel
Subject: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records for Blind Individuals


The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement with the Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to remedy violations of the ADA. The settlement resolves allegations that the Clerk of Courts failed to provide a blind attorney with electronic court documents in an accessible format, despite repeated requests.  Under the settlement agreement, the Orange County Clerk of Courts will provide individuals with disabilities with any document in the official court record in an accessible format upon request, and ensure that the Clerk of Courts' website is accessible to individuals with disabilities, including blind individuals, in accordance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA, available at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&100&&&http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/>.

To find out more about this settlemen<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&101&&&http://www.ada.gov/occ.htm>t or the ADA, call the Justice Department's toll-free ADA information<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&102&&&http://www.ada.gov/ta-pubs-pg2.htm> line at 800-514-0301 or 800-514-0383 (TDD), or access its ADA website at www.ada.gov<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&103&&&http://www.ada.gov>.

________________________________
[cid:image001.jpg at 01CFA271.A65FBCD0]<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&104&&&http://www.google.com>  Follow<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&105&&&http://twitter.com/TheJusticeDept> The Department of Justice on Twitter. |   [cid:image001.jpg at 01CFA271.A65FBCD0] <http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&106&&&http://facebook.com/DOJ>   Like<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&107&&&http://facebook.com/DOJ> The Department of Justice on Facebook.
________________________________
You have received this e-mail because you have asked to be notified of changes to the U.S. Department of Justice<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&108&&&http://justice.gov> website. GovDelivery is providing this service on behalf of the Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW * Washington, DC 20530 * 202-514-2000 and may not use your subscription information for any other purposes.

Manage your Subscriptions<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&109&&&https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOJ/subscriber/new?preferences=true> | Department of Justice Privacy Policy <http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&110&&&http://www.justice.gov/privacy-file.htm>  | GovDelivery Privacy Policy <http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&111&&&https://service.govdelivery.com/service/privacy_partner.html?code=USDOJ>





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 335 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140718/64add21b/attachment-0008.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 332 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140718/64add21b/attachment-0009.jpg>

From Susan.Kelly at pima.gov  Fri Jul 18 18:49:14 2014
From: Susan.Kelly at pima.gov (Susan Kelly)
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 18:49:14 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange
 County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records
 for Blind Individuals
In-Reply-To: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971F60@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>
References: <17116007.744@public.govdelivery.com>
	<04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971F60@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380B5822@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>

I have already cited this in two motions for reasonable accommodation with our local court of appeals, because none of the transcripts and most of the trial court documents are inaccessible.  I have already been granted the requested time continuance on one, and will be following up with their IT and clerks to determine what their future plans are to fix the situation.  A wonderful case for making the courts follow the same rules that they enforce!

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nightingale, Noel via blindlaw
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 10:19 AM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records for Blind Individuals



From: U.S. Department of Justice [mailto:usdoj at public.govdelivery.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 11:16 AM
To: Nightingale, Noel
Subject: Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to Ensure Equal Access to Court Records for Blind Individuals


The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement with the Orange County Clerk of Courts in Florida to remedy violations of the ADA. The settlement resolves allegations that the Clerk of Courts failed to provide a blind attorney with electronic court documents in an accessible format, despite repeated requests.  Under the settlement agreement, the Orange County Clerk of Courts will provide individuals with disabilities with any document in the official court record in an accessible format upon request, and ensure that the Clerk of Courts' website is accessible to individuals with disabilities, including blind individuals, in accordance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA, available at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&100&&&http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/>.

To find out more about this settlemen<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&101&&&http://www.ada.gov/occ.htm>t or the ADA, call the Justice Department's toll-free ADA information<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&102&&&http://www.ada.gov/ta-pubs-pg2.htm> line at 800-514-0301 or 800-514-0383 (TDD), or access its ADA website at www.ada.gov<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&103&&&http://www.ada.gov>.

________________________________
[cid:image001.jpg at 01CFA271.A65FBCD0]<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&104&&&http://www.google.com>  Follow<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&105&&&http://twitter.com/TheJusticeDept> The Department of Justice on Twitter. |   [cid:image001.jpg at 01CFA271.A65FBCD0] <http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&106&&&http://facebook.com/DOJ>   Like<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&107&&&http://facebook.com/DOJ> The Department of Justice on Facebook.
________________________________
You have received this e-mail because you have asked to be notified of changes to the U.S. Department of Justice<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&108&&&http://justice.gov> website. GovDelivery is providing this service on behalf of the Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW * Washington, DC 20530 * 202-514-2000 and may not use your subscription information for any other purposes.

Manage your Subscriptions<http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&109&&&https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOJ/subscriber/new?preferences=true> | Department of Justice Privacy Policy <http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&110&&&http://www.justice.gov/privacy-file.htm>  | GovDelivery Privacy Policy <http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTQwNzE3LjM0MTg3NzMxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE0MDcxNy4zNDE4NzczMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MTE2MDA3JmVtYWlsaWQ9bm9lbC5uaWdodGluZ2FsZUBlZC5nb3YmdXNlcmlkPW5vZWwubmlnaHRpbmdhbGVAZWQuZ292JmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&111&&&https://service.govdelivery.com/service/privacy_partner.html?code=USDOJ>







From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Fri Jul 18 20:26:46 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:26:46 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] More Delay for DOJ Web Regs - Does it Matter?,
	Law Office of Lainey Feingold, June 2 2014
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928EF51@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928EF51@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971FE3@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


Link:
http://lflegal.com/2014/06/doj-delay/

Text:
More Delay for DOJ Web Regs - Does it Matter?
[cid:image003.jpg at 01CFA1C4.31CA57C0]Surprise Surprise. The United States Department of Justice has announced another delay in its long awaited website accessibility rules. The rules, if they are ever enacted, will address technical standards and obligations of state and local government agencies and public accommodations (private entities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act) to make websites accessible to people with disabilities.
According to information released the last week in May, the next step in the regulatory process for private sector websites is now scheduled for March 2015. The next step for any rules governing state and local government web sites is this summer. These dates have been moved so many times that few in the field give them much credence. I certainly don't. But despite the delay, and as described below, the DOJ has shown by its actions<http://lflegal.com/2014/06/doj-delay/#ADA> that entities with access barriers on their websites run afoul of federal law TODAY.
Saying that the DOJ "announced" its most recent delay is an overstatement. "Whispered" might be a better word. The news was buried in what is called a Unified Agenda. Federal agencies are supposed to regularly update the public about pending regulations. The web regulations have been pending since July 26, 2010 when the DOJ issued its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM). The public comment period ended on January 24, 2011. Ever since then, the DOJ has been announcing deadlines for the next step - and then moving those deadlines as the target date approaches.
That next step in the rulemaking process is the Notice of Proposed Rule Making, or NPRM. Once (if) the NPRM is issued, there will be another public comment period, and (maybe) eventually there will be a final rule. You can find the new dates for the NPRMs at the very end of documents about web regulations published last week.
*      Read the updated DOJ document about state and local government web regulations<http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201404&RIN=1190-AA65>.
*      The updated document for private sector web regulations<http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201404&RIN=1190-AA61> moves the NPRM date to March 2015.
Hats off to the ADA Title III blog of defense firm Seyfarth Shaw<http://www.adatitleiii.com/>, which first uncovered the hard-to-find new dates for the regulations.
share on twitter<http://twitter.com/share?url=http://lflegal.com/2014/06/doj-delay/&text=More%20Delay%20for%20DOJ%20Web%20Regs%20-%20Does%20it%20Matter?&via=lflegal>
We May Not Have Regulations, but We Still Have the ADA
Even though it can't seem to issue web accessibility regulations, the United States Department of Justice has recently been a forceful advocate for web accessibility. The Department has been crystal clear that the ADA already requires websites to be accessible.
In May 2012 the Department filed a Statement of Interest in litigation against Netflix<http://www.ada.gov/briefs/netflix_SOI.pdf> for failing to caption streaming video. The Department agreed with the National Association of the Deaf that the lack of captioning violated the ADA:
[T]he Department of Justice ("DOJ" or the "Department") has long interpreted title III to apply to web services, and DOJ's ongoing regulatory developments concerning the accessibility of web content and services support that Netflix is a public accommodation subject to title III of the ADA.U.S. DOJ Netflix Statement of Interest at page 4.
The fact that that the regulatory process is not yet complete does not support any inference whatsoever that web-based services are not already covered by the ADA, or should not be covered by the ADA. U.S. DOJ Netflix Statement of Interest at page 12.
Consistent with its actions in Netflix, the DOJ recently filed papers in a South Florida case challenging a company's failure to have point of sale devices that allow blind customers to independently enter their PIN. Referring to websites, the Department told the Court that the ADA applies to issues not expressly mentioned in the law:
Indeed, there are many instances where the Department has found physical and communication barriers not specifically identified in its regulation or the ADA Standards to be covered under title III. For example, the Department has long considered websites to be covered by title III despite the fact that there are no specific technical requirements for websites currently in the regulation or ADA Standards. April 10, 2014 Statement of Interest Filed by DOJ in Lucky Brand case
Read the DOJ Statement of Interest in the South Florida case against Lucky Brand<http://www.ada.gov/briefs/lucky_brand_soi.pdf>. The DOJ's activity in the case is listed in its summary of enforcement activities<http://www.ada.gov/enforce_activities.htm#luckybrand>.
And in March of this year, the Department entered into a Consent Decree with H&R Block requiring accessibility of its websites and mobile apps under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Consent Decree requires that the tax giant comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, which the Department described as "[t]he recognized international industry standards for web accessibility." Read the DOJ press release announcing the H&R Block settlement<http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/March/14-crt-239.html>. The H&R Block Consent Decree<http://www.ada.gov/hrb-cd.htm> is also online.
No More Excuses
With these recent actions by the Department of Justice, there is no excuse for any site owner or developer to wait for regulations before undertaking digital accessibility plans. The ADA requires web accessibility. People with disabilities need web accessibility. It's good coding practice, good usability practice, good for business. And there is a recognized international standard that works. Let's stop waiting for regulations. Let's start making the promise of a web for everyone a reality.
Resources on LFLegal about the DOJ Web Regulations
*      July 2010 post about the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding web accessibility<http://lflegal.com/2010/07/doj-anprm/>, with links to the DOJ ANPRM.
*      My January 2011 testimony before the Department of Justice<http://lflegal.com/2011/01/doj-testimony/> during the public comment period on the proposed web regulations.
*      In July, 2011 I wrote about continued frustration with the Department's delayed regulations<http://lflegal.com/2011/07/web-delay/>.
________________________________

Simplified Summary: This is a post about the U.S. Department of Justice. In 2010 the Agency began a process to create rules about website accessibility. There are still no rules. The Department keeps delaying them. Last week the DOJ said the next step towards rules for websites won't happen until March 2015. The next step for state and local government websites might be this summer. But the DOJ has also been involved in court cases about web accessibility. In those cases the Department is clear that websites should be accessible. There is no reason to wait for new regulations. Websites should be accessible today.

Filed under Accessibility Laws and Regulations<http://lflegal.com/category/accessibility-laws-and-regulations/>, News and Articles<http://lflegal.com/category/articles/>, Web Accessibility<http://lflegal.com/category/web-accessibility/> on Jun 2nd, 2014<http://lflegal.com/2014/>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6663 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140718/4d166ba9/attachment-0004.jpg>

From theweird1 at mediacombb.net  Sat Jul 19 08:57:21 2014
From: theweird1 at mediacombb.net (Loren Wakefield)
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 03:57:21 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] More Delay for DOJ Web Regs - Does it Matter?,
	Law Office of Lainey Feingold, June 2 2014
In-Reply-To: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971FE3@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928EF51@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
	<04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2971FE3@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <001701cfa32f$73ad2070$5b076150$@mediacombb.net>

Myabe we should convince them the regs are need for all the people crossing
our borders.  

Loren 



-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
Nightingale, Noel via blindlaw
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 3:27 PM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] More Delay for DOJ Web Regs - Does it Matter?, Law
Office of Lainey Feingold, June 2 2014


Link:
http://lflegal.com/2014/06/doj-delay/

Text:
More Delay for DOJ Web Regs - Does it Matter?
[cid:image003.jpg at 01CFA1C4.31CA57C0]Surprise Surprise. The United States
Department of Justice has announced another delay in its long awaited
website accessibility rules. The rules, if they are ever enacted, will
address technical standards and obligations of state and local government
agencies and public accommodations (private entities covered by the
Americans with Disabilities Act) to make websites accessible to people with
disabilities.
According to information released the last week in May, the next step in the
regulatory process for private sector websites is now scheduled for March
2015. The next step for any rules governing state and local government web
sites is this summer. These dates have been moved so many times that few in
the field give them much credence. I certainly don't. But despite the delay,
and as described below, the DOJ has shown by its
actions<http://lflegal.com/2014/06/doj-delay/#ADA> that entities with access
barriers on their websites run afoul of federal law TODAY.
Saying that the DOJ "announced" its most recent delay is an overstatement.
"Whispered" might be a better word. The news was buried in what is called a
Unified Agenda. Federal agencies are supposed to regularly update the public
about pending regulations. The web regulations have been pending since July
26, 2010 when the DOJ issued its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making
(ANPRM). The public comment period ended on January 24, 2011. Ever since
then, the DOJ has been announcing deadlines for the next step - and then
moving those deadlines as the target date approaches.
That next step in the rulemaking process is the Notice of Proposed Rule
Making, or NPRM. Once (if) the NPRM is issued, there will be another public
comment period, and (maybe) eventually there will be a final rule. You can
find the new dates for the NPRMs at the very end of documents about web
regulations published last week.
*      Read the updated DOJ document about state and local government web
regulations<http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201404&RI
N=1190-AA65>.
*      The updated document for private sector web
regulations<http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201404&RI
N=1190-AA61> moves the NPRM date to March 2015.
Hats off to the ADA Title III blog of defense firm Seyfarth
Shaw<http://www.adatitleiii.com/>, which first uncovered the hard-to-find
new dates for the regulations.
share on
twitter<http://twitter.com/share?url=http://lflegal.com/2014/06/doj-delay/&t
ext=More%20Delay%20for%20DOJ%20Web%20Regs%20-%20Does%20it%20Matter?&via=lfle
gal>
We May Not Have Regulations, but We Still Have the ADA Even though it can't
seem to issue web accessibility regulations, the United States Department of
Justice has recently been a forceful advocate for web accessibility. The
Department has been crystal clear that the ADA already requires websites to
be accessible.
In May 2012 the Department filed a Statement of Interest in litigation
against Netflix<http://www.ada.gov/briefs/netflix_SOI.pdf> for failing to
caption streaming video. The Department agreed with the National Association
of the Deaf that the lack of captioning violated the ADA:
[T]he Department of Justice ("DOJ" or the "Department") has long interpreted
title III to apply to web services, and DOJ's ongoing regulatory
developments concerning the accessibility of web content and services
support that Netflix is a public accommodation subject to title III of the
ADA.U.S. DOJ Netflix Statement of Interest at page 4.
The fact that that the regulatory process is not yet complete does not
support any inference whatsoever that web-based services are not already
covered by the ADA, or should not be covered by the ADA. U.S. DOJ Netflix
Statement of Interest at page 12.
Consistent with its actions in Netflix, the DOJ recently filed papers in a
South Florida case challenging a company's failure to have point of sale
devices that allow blind customers to independently enter their PIN.
Referring to websites, the Department told the Court that the ADA applies to
issues not expressly mentioned in the law:
Indeed, there are many instances where the Department has found physical and
communication barriers not specifically identified in its regulation or the
ADA Standards to be covered under title III. For example, the Department has
long considered websites to be covered by title III despite the fact that
there are no specific technical requirements for websites currently in the
regulation or ADA Standards. April 10, 2014 Statement of Interest Filed by
DOJ in Lucky Brand case Read the DOJ Statement of Interest in the South
Florida case against Lucky
Brand<http://www.ada.gov/briefs/lucky_brand_soi.pdf>. The DOJ's activity in
the case is listed in its summary of enforcement
activities<http://www.ada.gov/enforce_activities.htm#luckybrand>.
And in March of this year, the Department entered into a Consent Decree with
H&R Block requiring accessibility of its websites and mobile apps under the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The Consent Decree requires that the tax
giant comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, which
the Department described as "[t]he recognized international industry
standards for web accessibility." Read the DOJ press release announcing the
H&R Block
settlement<http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/March/14-crt-239.html>. The
H&R Block Consent Decree<http://www.ada.gov/hrb-cd.htm> is also online.
No More Excuses
With these recent actions by the Department of Justice, there is no excuse
for any site owner or developer to wait for regulations before undertaking
digital accessibility plans. The ADA requires web accessibility. People with
disabilities need web accessibility. It's good coding practice, good
usability practice, good for business. And there is a recognized
international standard that works. Let's stop waiting for regulations. Let's
start making the promise of a web for everyone a reality.
Resources on LFLegal about the DOJ Web Regulations
*      July 2010 post about the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
regarding web accessibility<http://lflegal.com/2010/07/doj-anprm/>, with
links to the DOJ ANPRM.
*      My January 2011 testimony before the Department of
Justice<http://lflegal.com/2011/01/doj-testimony/> during the public comment
period on the proposed web regulations.
*      In July, 2011 I wrote about continued frustration with the
Department's delayed regulations<http://lflegal.com/2011/07/web-delay/>.
________________________________

Simplified Summary: This is a post about the U.S. Department of Justice. In
2010 the Agency began a process to create rules about website accessibility.
There are still no rules. The Department keeps delaying them. Last week the
DOJ said the next step towards rules for websites won't happen until March
2015. The next step for state and local government websites might be this
summer. But the DOJ has also been involved in court cases about web
accessibility. In those cases the Department is clear that websites should
be accessible. There is no reason to wait for new regulations. Websites
should be accessible today.

Filed under Accessibility Laws and
Regulations<http://lflegal.com/category/accessibility-laws-and-regulations/>
, News and Articles<http://lflegal.com/category/articles/>, Web
Accessibility<http://lflegal.com/category/web-accessibility/> on Jun 2nd,
2014<http://lflegal.com/2014/>



From kelbycarlson at gmail.com  Mon Jul 21 17:15:22 2014
From: kelbycarlson at gmail.com (Kelby Carlson)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:15:22 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
Message-ID: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>

Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games 
either on the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing 
(conceptually, more or less) is extrapolating-for example-places 
where certain objects cannot be in the case of order puzzles.  
This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.

Best,

K.  S.  Carlson

Vanderbilt University



From rjaquiss at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 21 18:30:08 2014
From: rjaquiss at earthlink.net (Robert Jaquiss)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 11:30:08 -0700
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>

Hello:

     If sighted people have a diagram to look at when taking a test, then
blind test takers need to be provided tactile diagrams. You also need to
know if the diagram is a true diagram or is it a perspective view of three
dimensional objects. Suppose that you have a jigsaw puzzle. A diagram could
be made showing the outline of each piece. It would then be possible to
define how the puzzle would go together. If the diagram is of three
dimensional parts, then the diagram will appear to the blind reader totally
different than it will to a sighted reader. 
There is essentially no way to describe a diagram using text. Hope this
makes sense.
Regards,

Robert

Robert Jaquiss
Tactile Graphics Solutions LLC.
Email: rjaquiss at earthlink.net
*** Specializing in computerized production of tactile graphics, ALT
development, technology assessments, product evaluations and web site
certification. ***

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
Carlson via blindlaw
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:15 AM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT

Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually, more
or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot be
in the case of order puzzles.  
This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.

Best,

K.  S.  Carlson

Vanderbilt University


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjaquiss%40earthlink.n
et



From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Mon Jul 21 20:28:19 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:28:19 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Apply for the Virtual Student Foreign Service until July
 22, 2014!, ED Notebook July 21 2014
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928F215@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928F215@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2972132@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


Link:
https://connected.ed.gov/Pages/FSA-Virtual-Interns.aspx

Text:
Apply for the Virtual Student Foreign Service until July 22, 2014!

Are you yearning to obtain hands-on experience learning about how the Department of Education operates, but are unable to travel to Washington, D.C., for an internship? Federal Student Aid (FSA), a principal office of the U.S. Department of Education (ED), is once again teaming up with the Department of State's Virtual Student Foreign Service (VSFS) to harness technology and to engage students who are interested in careers in public service but can't travel to Washington.
VSFS is an eIntern program housed in the Department of State that matches student interns with federal agencies to complete projects virtually from college and university campuses in the United States and throughout the world. Check out this introductory video<http://youtu.be/zKcm8TqVvbc> for an overview of the VSFS program or visit the VSFS website<http://www.state.gov/vsfs/> for more information. This year, FSA has eleven unique opportunities for you to be part of the postsecondary education conversation.
Interested undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate students can apply for up to three positions until July 22, 2014 at USAJobs.gov. Available positions at FSA are posted on state.gov/vsfs and are summarized below:
Tag

Office

Project Name

Project Summary

FSA-US-1

Chief Operating Officer

Database System Development

Enhance and redesign the official FSA Data Request Database System

FSA-US-2

Chief Operating Officer

Strategic Planning Research and Analysis

Help FSA craft its upcoming Five-Year Strategic Plan

FSA-US-3

Customer Experience

Digital Engagement

Use your social media skills to inform and impact student choices about financing their college education through multimedia, content creation / community management, and social analysis

FSA-US-4

Customer Experience

Writing and Editing for Web and Print

Flex your writing, editing, and proofreading muscles while helping to make information about college financial aid as simple and understandable as possible

FSA-US-5

Customer Experience

Database Developer/Survey Analyst

Support national awareness of FSA and the availability of aid for postsecondary education; empower current and potential customers to make informed decisions about planning and paying for college; and share customer insights with the organization to inform decisions

FSA-US-6

Customer Experience

Bilingual (English-Spanish) Edits

Develop material, advertise, and help students find out how to pay for college

FSA-US-7

Customer Experience

Financial Literacy Communication

Identify creative means to communicate the availability of tools and resources for financial literacy and making good decisions when choosing and paying for college

FSA-US-8

Program Compliance

State Authorization Verification

Gather and validate pertinent information for an upcoming data system; analyze information for data consistency

FSA-US-9

Technology

Virtual eInternship

Learn and contribute to various initiatives focused on emerging technology topics such as big data, mobile computing, and enterprise warehousing with research, writing, prototype development, proofs of concept, and creating graphics and pictorials

FSA-US-10

Technology

Strategic Plan Research Assistance and Editing

Help draft and edit a strategic information technology plan with a clear "line of sight" from the White House to senior managers' performance goals in FSA's Technology office

FSA-US-11

Technology

Research Assistance and Editing Annual Information Technology Reports

Research the world of public and private sector performance reporting of information technology to help develop a best-in-class annual report of real-life organization results

To be eligible to apply, you must be:
* A U.S. citizen
* A college or graduate/post-graduate student of freshman status or higher
* A part-time or full-time student pursuing an undergraduate or graduate/post-graduate degree at an accredited U.S. college or university
To apply, you will need:
* A copy of your official or unofficial transcript
* A statement of interest
* A resume
For more information, visit: www.state.gov/vsfs<http://www.state.gov/vsfs>. If you have specific questions about FSA-posted projects, please e-mail VirtualIntern at ed.gov<mailto:VirtualIntern at ed.gov>.


From rthomas at emplmntattorney.com  Mon Jul 21 22:34:33 2014
From: rthomas at emplmntattorney.com (Russell J. Thomas)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:34:33 -0700
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
	<000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000001cfa533$f2206c40$d66144c0$@com>

The recent series of posts concerning the LSAT prompts me to inquire whether
the NFB has ever approached the providers of the LSAT on the subject of
adopting criteria for waiving the LSAT if an applicant's GPA was at a
certain level.

Speaking for myself, I am old enough to have applied to law school when the
LSAT was in its early years. Since no one knew how I would take the test,
the LSAT was waived and I was admitted on the basis of my undergraduate
grades.

If an applicant's grades are high, why does a law school admissions officer
need a grade on a standardized test in order to make an admissions decision?



Respectfully, 
RUSSELL J. THOMAS, JR.
Principal Attorney 

Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr. 
Newport Beach Office
4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101
Newport Beach, California 92660
T: 949-752-0101
F: 949-257-4756

Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr. 
Beverly Hills Office
486 North Camden Drive
Suite 200
Beverly Hills, California 90210
T: 310-601-3012

The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above.  This message
may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is
privileged and confidential.  If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in
error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original
message.

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Robert
Jaquiss via blindlaw
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 11:30 AM
To: 'Kelby Carlson'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT

Hello:

     If sighted people have a diagram to look at when taking a test, then
blind test takers need to be provided tactile diagrams. You also need to
know if the diagram is a true diagram or is it a perspective view of three
dimensional objects. Suppose that you have a jigsaw puzzle. A diagram could
be made showing the outline of each piece. It would then be possible to
define how the puzzle would go together. If the diagram is of three
dimensional parts, then the diagram will appear to the blind reader totally
different than it will to a sighted reader. 
There is essentially no way to describe a diagram using text. Hope this
makes sense.
Regards,

Robert

Robert Jaquiss
Tactile Graphics Solutions LLC.
Email: rjaquiss at earthlink.net
*** Specializing in computerized production of tactile graphics, ALT
development, technology assessments, product evaluations and web site
certification. ***

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
Carlson via blindlaw
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:15 AM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT

Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually, more
or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot be
in the case of order puzzles.  
This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.

Best,

K.  S.  Carlson

Vanderbilt University


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjaquiss%40earthlink.n
et


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rthomas%40emplmntattor
ney.com



From kelbycarlson at gmail.com  Mon Jul 21 22:38:53 2014
From: kelbycarlson at gmail.com (kelby carlson)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:38:53 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <000001cfa533$f2206c40$d66144c0$@com>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
	<000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
	<000001cfa533$f2206c40$d66144c0$@com>
Message-ID: <CAPMpJYu6C=KLrF2Xfqh1=Yz-Rv2BF+CGUZsKo=YZ7gMLVt61Kg@mail.gmail.com>

I believe it actually used to be the case that the LSAT could be waved
at the discretion of the school. However, now the rules have been
changed and the ABA does not allow waving of the test.



On 7/21/14, Russell J. Thomas via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> The recent series of posts concerning the LSAT prompts me to inquire
> whether
> the NFB has ever approached the providers of the LSAT on the subject of
> adopting criteria for waiving the LSAT if an applicant's GPA was at a
> certain level.
>
> Speaking for myself, I am old enough to have applied to law school when the
> LSAT was in its early years. Since no one knew how I would take the test,
> the LSAT was waived and I was admitted on the basis of my undergraduate
> grades.
>
> If an applicant's grades are high, why does a law school admissions officer
> need a grade on a standardized test in order to make an admissions
> decision?
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
> RUSSELL J. THOMAS, JR.
> Principal Attorney
>
> Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr.
> Newport Beach Office
> 4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101
> Newport Beach, California 92660
> T: 949-752-0101
> F: 949-257-4756
>
> Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr.
> Beverly Hills Office
> 486 North Camden Drive
> Suite 200
> Beverly Hills, California 90210
> T: 310-601-3012
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the
> personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above.  This
> message
> may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is
> privileged and confidential.  If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in
> error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
> message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original
> message.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Robert
> Jaquiss via blindlaw
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 11:30 AM
> To: 'Kelby Carlson'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
>
> Hello:
>
>      If sighted people have a diagram to look at when taking a test, then
> blind test takers need to be provided tactile diagrams. You also need to
> know if the diagram is a true diagram or is it a perspective view of three
> dimensional objects. Suppose that you have a jigsaw puzzle. A diagram could
> be made showing the outline of each piece. It would then be possible to
> define how the puzzle would go together. If the diagram is of three
> dimensional parts, then the diagram will appear to the blind reader totally
> different than it will to a sighted reader.
> There is essentially no way to describe a diagram using text. Hope this
> makes sense.
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
> Robert Jaquiss
> Tactile Graphics Solutions LLC.
> Email: rjaquiss at earthlink.net
> *** Specializing in computerized production of tactile graphics, ALT
> development, technology assessments, product evaluations and web site
> certification. ***
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
> Carlson via blindlaw
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:15 AM
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
>
> Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
> the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually, more
> or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot
> be
> in the case of order puzzles.
> This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.
>
> Best,
>
> K.  S.  Carlson
>
> Vanderbilt University
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjaquiss%40earthlink.n
> et
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rthomas%40emplmntattor
> ney.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kelbycarlson%40gmail.com
>


From kelbycarlson at gmail.com  Mon Jul 21 22:39:53 2014
From: kelbycarlson at gmail.com (kelby carlson)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:39:53 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <CAPMpJYu6C=KLrF2Xfqh1=Yz-Rv2BF+CGUZsKo=YZ7gMLVt61Kg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
	<000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
	<000001cfa533$f2206c40$d66144c0$@com>
	<CAPMpJYu6C=KLrF2Xfqh1=Yz-Rv2BF+CGUZsKo=YZ7gMLVt61Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPMpJYus3h-O2jfegbj9bWM14WY=v4QrpQ86ChC0kORqF-dNAg@mail.gmail.com>

Also, I do not believe that the analytical reasoning section is
impossible to do well on as a blind person. I am just not good at
these sorts of word problems in general, and since I can't diagram
them I wanted to see what other methods have been used.



On 7/21/14, kelby carlson <kelbycarlson at gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe it actually used to be the case that the LSAT could be waved
> at the discretion of the school. However, now the rules have been
> changed and the ABA does not allow waving of the test.
>
>
>
> On 7/21/14, Russell J. Thomas via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> The recent series of posts concerning the LSAT prompts me to inquire
>> whether
>> the NFB has ever approached the providers of the LSAT on the subject of
>> adopting criteria for waiving the LSAT if an applicant's GPA was at a
>> certain level.
>>
>> Speaking for myself, I am old enough to have applied to law school when
>> the
>> LSAT was in its early years. Since no one knew how I would take the test,
>> the LSAT was waived and I was admitted on the basis of my undergraduate
>> grades.
>>
>> If an applicant's grades are high, why does a law school admissions
>> officer
>> need a grade on a standardized test in order to make an admissions
>> decision?
>>
>>
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> RUSSELL J. THOMAS, JR.
>> Principal Attorney
>>
>> Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr.
>> Newport Beach Office
>> 4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101
>> Newport Beach, California 92660
>> T: 949-752-0101
>> F: 949-257-4756
>>
>> Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr.
>> Beverly Hills Office
>> 486 North Camden Drive
>> Suite 200
>> Beverly Hills, California 90210
>> T: 310-601-3012
>>
>> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the
>> personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above.  This
>> message
>> may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such
>> is
>> privileged and confidential.  If the reader of this message is not the
>> intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
>> recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document
>> in
>> error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
>> this
>> message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication
>> in
>> error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original
>> message.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Robert
>> Jaquiss via blindlaw
>> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 11:30 AM
>> To: 'Kelby Carlson'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
>>
>> Hello:
>>
>>      If sighted people have a diagram to look at when taking a test, then
>> blind test takers need to be provided tactile diagrams. You also need to
>> know if the diagram is a true diagram or is it a perspective view of
>> three
>> dimensional objects. Suppose that you have a jigsaw puzzle. A diagram
>> could
>> be made showing the outline of each piece. It would then be possible to
>> define how the puzzle would go together. If the diagram is of three
>> dimensional parts, then the diagram will appear to the blind reader
>> totally
>> different than it will to a sighted reader.
>> There is essentially no way to describe a diagram using text. Hope this
>> makes sense.
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> Robert Jaquiss
>> Tactile Graphics Solutions LLC.
>> Email: rjaquiss at earthlink.net
>> *** Specializing in computerized production of tactile graphics, ALT
>> development, technology assessments, product evaluations and web site
>> certification. ***
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
>> Carlson via blindlaw
>> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:15 AM
>> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
>>
>> Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
>> the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually,
>> more
>> or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot
>> be
>> in the case of order puzzles.
>> This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> K.  S.  Carlson
>>
>> Vanderbilt University
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjaquiss%40earthlink.n
>> et
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rthomas%40emplmntattor
>> ney.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kelbycarlson%40gmail.com
>>
>


From philosopher25 at gmail.com  Mon Jul 21 23:05:42 2014
From: philosopher25 at gmail.com (Sexton, bruce)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:05:42 -0800
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <000901cfa538$4ce966f0$e6bc34d0$@gmail.com>

If I understand your question correctly, then you are trying to diagram
multiple chains of logic that go in different directions.  

To do this in excel, I imagine a cell in the center with a box of cells
around it.  So, if there is a chain p comes before q which is before r and
s, t and v come after q, then I would diagram 

P*q*r in my center cell and sq*s*t*V in a cell above the center or up and to
the right.  Same with if a chain comes before the center cell, but on the
opposite side.  

Does that help?  

-Bruce 
-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
Carlson via blindlaw
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 9:15 AM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT

Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually, more
or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot be
in the case of order puzzles.  
This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.

Best,

K.  S.  Carlson

Vanderbilt University


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.
com



From philosopher25 at gmail.com  Mon Jul 21 23:07:52 2014
From: philosopher25 at gmail.com (Sexton, bruce)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:07:52 -0800
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
	<000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000b01cfa538$9a0600b0$ce120210$@gmail.com>

My question for the list is, how do you efficiently switch between the
elements like the rules, main diagram, sub diagrams,, answer choices etc. of
the game while using excel.  

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Robert
Jaquiss via blindlaw
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:30 AM
To: 'Kelby Carlson'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT

Hello:

     If sighted people have a diagram to look at when taking a test, then
blind test takers need to be provided tactile diagrams. You also need to
know if the diagram is a true diagram or is it a perspective view of three
dimensional objects. Suppose that you have a jigsaw puzzle. A diagram could
be made showing the outline of each piece. It would then be possible to
define how the puzzle would go together. If the diagram is of three
dimensional parts, then the diagram will appear to the blind reader totally
different than it will to a sighted reader. 
There is essentially no way to describe a diagram using text. Hope this
makes sense.
Regards,

Robert

Robert Jaquiss
Tactile Graphics Solutions LLC.
Email: rjaquiss at earthlink.net
*** Specializing in computerized production of tactile graphics, ALT
development, technology assessments, product evaluations and web site
certification. ***

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
Carlson via blindlaw
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:15 AM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT

Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually, more
or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot be
in the case of order puzzles.  
This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.

Best,

K.  S.  Carlson

Vanderbilt University


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjaquiss%40earthlink.n
et


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.
com



From mnowicki4 at icloud.com  Tue Jul 22 10:03:28 2014
From: mnowicki4 at icloud.com (Michael Nowicki)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 12:03:28 +0200
Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
In-Reply-To: <000b01cfa538$9a0600b0$ce120210$@gmail.com>
References: <53cd4ace.88fab60a.5118.07a3@mx.google.com>
	<000401cfa511$cd62e030$6828a090$@earthlink.net>
	<000b01cfa538$9a0600b0$ce120210$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <35D43111-6B65-425F-9AEF-3A4097D453B0@icloud.com>

Switching between the spreadsheet and the electronic test booklet is just like switching between any two programs. All you need to do is press all plus tab as for the spreadsheet itself, I recommend using a separate row for each part of the diagram. For instance, I used one roll for the rules, one row for deductions, etc.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 22, 2014, at 1:07 AM, "Sexton, bruce via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> My question for the list is, how do you efficiently switch between the
> elements like the rules, main diagram, sub diagrams,, answer choices etc. of
> the game while using excel.  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Robert
> Jaquiss via blindlaw
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:30 AM
> To: 'Kelby Carlson'; 'Blind Law Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
> 
> Hello:
> 
>     If sighted people have a diagram to look at when taking a test, then
> blind test takers need to be provided tactile diagrams. You also need to
> know if the diagram is a true diagram or is it a perspective view of three
> dimensional objects. Suppose that you have a jigsaw puzzle. A diagram could
> be made showing the outline of each piece. It would then be possible to
> define how the puzzle would go together. If the diagram is of three
> dimensional parts, then the diagram will appear to the blind reader totally
> different than it will to a sighted reader. 
> There is essentially no way to describe a diagram using text. Hope this
> makes sense.
> Regards,
> 
> Robert
> 
> Robert Jaquiss
> Tactile Graphics Solutions LLC.
> Email: rjaquiss at earthlink.net
> *** Specializing in computerized production of tactile graphics, ALT
> development, technology assessments, product evaluations and web site
> certification. ***
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kelby
> Carlson via blindlaw
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:15 AM
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Subject: [blindlaw] Two-tier Diagrams for the LSAT
> 
> Anyone have any tips on doing two-tier diagrams for logic games either on
> the BrailleNote or Excel? What I'm having trouble doing (conceptually, more
> or less) is extrapolating-for example-places where certain objects cannot be
> in the case of order puzzles.  
> This is definitely the hardest section of the test for me.
> 
> Best,
> 
> K.  S.  Carlson
> 
> Vanderbilt University
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjaquiss%40earthlink.n
> et
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.
> com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mnowicki4%40icloud.com


From slabarre at labarrelaw.com  Tue Jul 22 14:43:36 2014
From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:43:36 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: [DRBA] 2 job postings where we need the right folks
In-Reply-To: <29E2083D8849FE43BF6A456890490A0C20BF5B86@BALT-X1-EXCH2K8.BGL.root>
References: <29E2083D8849FE43BF6A456890490A0C20BF5B86@BALT-X1-EXCH2K8.BGL.root>
Message-ID: <01f401cfa5bb$524d0380$f6e70a80$@labarrelaw.com>

Fyi and I agree with Dan.

 

 

From: Disability Rights Bar Association [mailto:DRBA at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Daniel F. Goldstein
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 7:33 AM
To: DRBA at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: [DRBA] 2 job postings where we need the right folks

 

First one:

 

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs <http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/>  is one of the premier civil rights agencies in the federal government. For the past 45 years we have been on the front lines of protecting workers, promoting diversity and enforcing the laws which require those who do business with the federal government – contractors and subcontractors – to take affirmative action and prohibit discrimination in employment. 

 

Nearly one in four American workers is employed by a federal contractor. That’s close to 200,000 businesses with contracts totaling almost $700 billion. Given this breadth of purview, OFCCP’s enforcement actions send a clear message that when it comes to creating a level playing field for workers and businesses, the United States Government puts its contracting dollars behind employers who understand that a 21st century American workforce ought to look like 21st century America. 

 

President Barack Obama and Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez have made OFCCP’s worker protection activities a priority of this Administration and, as a result, our office has been expanding. Anyone interested in a career in civil rights and public service is encouraged to check out the following job openings at OFCCP’s national headquarters in Washington, DC, and in our field offices around the country. Please forward this information to talented candidates who might be interested. 

 

Thanks!                                                                                                                                                                                             

 

 

PLEASE NOTE: PERSONS WHO ARE CURRENT/FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH COMPETITIVE/REINSTATEMENT ELIGIBILITY, ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO USE THE “US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES” LINKS TO APPLY, WHERE APPLICABLE.

 

NATIONAL OFFICE

 

Chief, Branch of Regulatory, Legislative and Policy Development (BRLP), GS-14

Salary Range: $106,263.00 to $138,136

Description: The incumbent personally and through subordinate staff, writes and updates the Federal Contract Compliance Manual (FCCM) which is the repository for current OFCCP policies and procedures; drafts new FCCM chapters as needed; drafts amendments to FCCM in response to policy, legal and programmatic changes; coordinates new and revised FCCM chapters with the SOL; clears FCCM chapters and amendments with the EEOC, OMB, where appropriate; drafts notices issuing changes to the FCCM; reviews court decisions affecting the area of employment law and equal employment opportunity and assesses their impact on OFCCP policy and issuances; consults with the SOL on potential impact of cases, and prepares amendments to the FCCM, where applicable; serves as a resource for OFCCP staff concerning policy issues on employment discrimination.
Closes: Thursday, July 24, 2014 

Link to Apply <https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/375736500>  - this announcement is open to US Citizens

Link to Apply <https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/375737700>  – this announcement is open to US Federal Government Employees

 

 

Second One:

 

Title: Senior Civil Rights Analyst – GS-0160-15  

 

Location: Washington, DC (CRD) 

 

Open – July 9, 2014 

 

Close – July 30, 2014 

 

https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/372879300

HHS-OCR-MP-14-1136805

 

https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/372836000

HHS-OCR-DE-14-1134906

 

 

 

Daniel F. Goldstein

Attorney


BROWN GOLDSTEIN LEVY


120 E. Baltimore Street, Suite 1700


Baltimore, MD  21202


Tel.:      410.962.1030 x1314


Direct:  443-923-1314

Fax:      410.385.0869 


Email:  dfg at browngold.com

About Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP
Brown, Goldstein & Levy, based in Baltimore, Maryland, handles both civil and criminal litigation and has active practices in many other areas of the law, including family law, disability rights, and health care. For more information, see  <http://www.browngold.com/> www.browngold.com.

CONFIDENTIALITY:  This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email states it can be disclosed; it may also be privileged. If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from your system. Thank you.

 

REMINDER: The DRBA listserv is intended to facilitate open discussion and sharing of ideas. Members need to feel confident that their discussions will not be distributed beyond the group unnecessarily. PLEASE CONSULT WITH THE SENDER(S) BEFORE FORWARDING ANY LISTSERV DISCUSSIONS BEYOND THE DRBA GROUP. DONATE: The DRBA is a valuable free resource to its members. But the DRBA does have expenses for management, web and listserv services. PLEASE DONATE TODAY any amount you wish Online at http://GiveToSU.com Select “Burton Blatt Institute Fund” from the “My gift is designated to” drop down menu and indicate “DRBA” in the “Gift is to be used for” box. BRIEF BANK: Are you sharing briefs, interrogatories, decisions or other non-confidential resources on this listserv? ARCHIVE them for all present and future members by logging in to the DRBA website, going to the MEMBERS AREA and selecting ONLINE DOCUMENT DATABASE for further instructions. Contact DRBA-Law at law.syr.edu for login credentials and related help.


From slabarre at labarrelaw.com  Tue Jul 22 15:34:27 2014
From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:34:27 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: CRPD- infographic
In-Reply-To: <536A6F8F8486F94A982D8431ACEF3CC0D2F537@EXCH-MB-02.aba.ad.abanet.org>
References: <AB4AD35DC67B7D4199FFC778CBD67D15014370B1@EXCH-MB-02.aba.ad.abanet.org>
	<536A6F8F8486F94A982D8431ACEF3CC0D2F537@EXCH-MB-02.aba.ad.abanet.org>
Message-ID: <001c01cfa5c2$6ce61450$46b23cf0$@labarrelaw.com>

FYI

 

From: Commission on Disability Rights (Full)
[mailto:CDR-FULL at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG] On Behalf Of Allbright, Amy
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 9:01 AM
To: CDR-FULL at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG
Subject: FW: CRPD- infographic
Importance: High

 

Hi all, 

 

ABA is going to be making a big social media push later today and tomorrow
for CRPD. The Association developed an infographic that it is hoping to get
a lot of retweets, favorites, etc. 

 

I think it could be helpful if those who can tweet it out and/or send it to
your contacts who would want to post it as well. Basically, feel free to
share this with as many people as you would like to.

 

Amy L. Allbright

Director 

Commission on Disability Rights (CDR) - Mail Stop 11.0

American Bar Association (ABA)

1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW  Suite 400

Washington, DC 20036

T:  202.662.1575

F:  202.442.3439

Amy.Allbright at americanbar.org

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/disabilityrights.html

 

 

 

 

______________________________________
Thank you for your continued interest in this list. A summary of your
discussion list subscriptions, including CDR-FULL, can be found at
http://apps.americanbar.org/elistserv/home.cfm . This new List Subscription
Page allows you to manage your lists - unsubscribe from existing or join
others. 

If you have any issues you may either contact the list owner via email:
CDR-FULL-request at mail.americanbar.org , or the ABA Service Center at phone:
1-800-285-2221 or email: service at americanbar.org . 
______________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CRPD_infographic.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 567881 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140722/a09e9648/attachment-0004.jpg>

From slabarre at labarrelaw.com  Wed Jul 23 14:27:59 2014
From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre)
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:27:59 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Alt-tag for image
In-Reply-To: <ba7587c9ce064662960a73395f25fd1e@BN1PR07MB359.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <098292ca2cfe4d4e8e06b45e69d9a736@CO1PR07MB235.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
	<ba7587c9ce064662960a73395f25fd1e@BN1PR07MB359.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <032501cfa682$52c81f80$f8585e80$@labarrelaw.com>

Greetings, this is an accessible version of what I sent yesterday.  We are
urging everyone to contact their Senators to urge ratification of CRPD.

 

Thanks,

Scott  

 

From: Pare, John [mailto:JPare at nfb.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 8:12 AM
To: State President, Colorado
Subject: FW: Alt-tag for image 

 

Scott:

Attached is the infographic with the alt-tag.

John

 

John G. Paré Jr. 

Executive Director for Advocacy and Policy

National Federation of the Blind

 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CRPD Infographic.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 269400 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140723/22952f39/attachment-0004.pdf>

From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Wed Jul 23 15:38:39 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:38:39 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: DOJ Jobs
In-Reply-To: <6f43ebcbf087447599cec33f37f3be7f@BN1PR07MB310.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <87EAD4112E1ABA49BCA9055BEA384CBF1EFCF2C7@DPRC-EXCH-P05.JCONMAIL.doj.gov>
	<6f43ebcbf087447599cec33f37f3be7f@BN1PR07MB310.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C29723E0@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>



From: Jobs [mailto:jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Maurer, Patricia via Jobs
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:21 AM
To: jobs at nfbnet.org
Subject: [Jobs] FW: DOJ Jobs



From: Special Programs Vacancies [mailto:CRT.SpecProgVacancies at usdoj.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:50 AM
Subject: DOJ Jobs

The Civil Rights Division (Division) would like to thank each of you for participating in our efforts to increase outreach to individuals interested in working for the Division.  The Division hopes to attract a broad and diverse pool of qualified applicants, and, to that end, encourages you to forward this information to any qualified applicants, including qualified applicants with disabilities, who may be interested in working for the Division.

For your convenience, all current Division job announcements that are open to the public are listed below.  Please also remind members of your organization that all job announcements can always be found on the Division's homepage, http://www.justice.gov/crt/employment.  In addition, if you know of other organizations that might want to receive our job announcements, please let them know the process is very simple.  They just need to send an email to CRT.SpecProgVacancies at usdoj.gov<mailto:CRT.SpecProgVacancies at usdoj.gov>.  There are no elaborate forms to fill out - just an email indicating that the organization wishes to receive future job listings and the e-mail address for us to contact them.  Please do not hesitate to let us know if you have suggestions on how we can improve our outreach efforts.

The chart below includes the Civil Rights Division job opportunities currently available to the public.

Remarks

Position

Salary

Closing Date

        NEW

Paralegal Specialist (MPP)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/375440000>
Criminal Section

GS-950-9/11 ($52,146 to $82,019 per year)

7/30/14

        NEW

Paralegal Specialist (DEU)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/375708600>
Criminal Section

GS-950-9/11 ($52,146 to $82,019 per year)

7/30/14

        NEW

Supervisory Human Resources Specialist (MPP)<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/375660800>
Administrative Management Section

GS-201-14 ($106,263 to $138,136 per year)

7/30/14


Student Volunteers (Division-wide)<http://www.justice.gov/crt/employment/vol_intern_opps.php>

N/A (Volunteer)

See Description


Individuals interested in applying for these positions should comply with the application procedures and closing dates in the vacancy announcement.  The Division does not accept unsolicited resumes or applications (i.e., those not submitted in response to a particular vacancy announcement).  If you need more information about a specific Civil Rights Division vacancy, please call the Human Resources Office, Team 1 on (202) 514-3934.

-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Jobs mailing list
Jobs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/jobs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Jobs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/jobs_nfbnet.org/noel.nightingale%40ed.gov

From chris.stewart at uky.edu  Thu Jul 24 14:42:57 2014
From: chris.stewart at uky.edu (Stewart, Christopher K)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:42:57 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
Message-ID: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>

Hello All,

We've discussed a conference call for the LSAT, but the conversation
has gone no further. I propose August 7 as a date and will await
suggestions as to other dates or possible times. Moreover, I'm willing
to set up the call and write a memo of our discussions.

Best,
Chris

-- 
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
Staff Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
Co-President, American Constitution Society
California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757


From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Thu Jul 24 14:59:51 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Manners, Derek)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:59:51 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAP4LJpC+rqh9fe2efGYxidb7DKxB6xHrhS976UL3WyuODG8Lw@mail.gmail.com>

I'll be on a flight that day back to Cambridge.  It isn't a big deal if I'm
not on the call but I would enjoy the chance to share my experiences.
Given that, I'd propose we have it in the evening?  That may also be better
for others as well as it is a week day.

Best
Derek


On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw <
blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> We've discussed a conference call for the LSAT, but the conversation
> has gone no further. I propose August 7 as a date and will await
> suggestions as to other dates or possible times. Moreover, I'm willing
> to set up the call and write a memo of our discussions.
>
> Best,
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
> Staff Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
> Co-President, American Constitution Society
> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>

From ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com  Thu Jul 24 19:22:32 2014
From: ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com (Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc.)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:22:32 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DEA5A7DBE70C4D7782BDA4F1AC03EC4B@victory2>

Hello Chris:

Why not consider a Saturday, August 9?  Most folks don't work on Saturdays 
and it might be more convenient.  I'll propose 2:00 P.M. Eastern Time.

Sincerely,
Olusegun
Denver, Colorado 


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com



From philosopher25 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 24 19:47:17 2014
From: philosopher25 at gmail.com (philosopher25 at gmail.com)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:47:17 -0800
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <DEA5A7DBE70C4D7782BDA4F1AC03EC4B@victory2>
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<DEA5A7DBE70C4D7782BDA4F1AC03EC4B@victory2>
Message-ID: <7E7851A0-05E2-4CE0-93D5-E725C4232445@gmail.com>

Hello list,
Yes, the ninth at 2 PM Eastern time works for me.
If that works for everybody else, let's do it!



> On Jul 24, 2014, at 11:22 AM, "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc. via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello Chris:
> 
> Why not consider a Saturday, August 9?  Most folks don't work on Saturdays and it might be more convenient.  I'll propose 2:00 P.M. Eastern Time.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Olusegun
> Denver, Colorado 
> 
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.com


From kelbycarlson at gmail.com  Thu Jul 24 19:52:04 2014
From: kelbycarlson at gmail.com (Kelby Carlson)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:52:04 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
Message-ID: <53d1640d.a462b60a.20cf.2942@mx.google.com>

I would like to join in this, but will actually be on an airplane 
flight at that time.

K.



 ----- Original Message -----
From: philosopher25--- via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org
To: "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc." 
<ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com>,Blind Law Mailing List 
<blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Date sent: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:47:17 -0800
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call

Hello list,
Yes, the ninth at 2 PM Eastern time works for me.
If that works for everybody else, let's do it!



 On Jul 24, 2014, at 11:22 AM, "Olusegun -- Victory Associates 
LTD, Inc.  via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:

 Hello Chris:

 Why not consider a Saturday, August 9?  Most folks don't work on 
Saturdays and it might be more convenient.  I'll propose 2:00 
P.M.  Eastern Time.

 Sincerely,
 Olusegun
 Denver, Colorado

 ---
 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! 
Antivirus protection is active.
 http://www.avast.com


 _______________________________________________
 blindlaw mailing list
 blindlaw at nfbnet.org
 http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
 To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
info for blindlaw:
 
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher
25%40gmail.com

_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
for blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kelbycarlso
n%40gmail.com


From philosopher25 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 24 19:58:16 2014
From: philosopher25 at gmail.com (Sexton, bruce)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:58:16 -0800
Subject: [blindlaw] Anyone with Kaplan issues
Message-ID: <002401cfa779$9cf61c90$d6e255b0$@gmail.com>

Hello list,

 

I am looking nation-wide to collect the experiences of anyone who is a
Kaplan student having accessibility issues with books or the Kaplan website.
I am also interested to know if there is anyone in the new York area (1st or
second circuit)) who is having accessibility issues with Kaplan's resources.
If you have had issues in the past, please also contact me.   Please forward
this message to anyone who might fit this description and have them contact
me at:

 

Brucefsexton at gmail.com 

Or call

925.209.8595 

 

Thank You,

Bruce 


From awildheir at gmail.com  Thu Jul 24 22:24:31 2014
From: awildheir at gmail.com (Aimee Harwood)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 18:24:31 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <7E7851A0-05E2-4CE0-93D5-E725C4232445@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<DEA5A7DBE70C4D7782BDA4F1AC03EC4B@victory2>
	<7E7851A0-05E2-4CE0-93D5-E725C4232445@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7774E4E8-3000-4423-ADCE-CF6BD7C98E96@gmail.com>

Works for me as well.

Aimee

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 24, 2014, at 3:47 PM, philosopher25--- via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello list,
> Yes, the ninth at 2 PM Eastern time works for me.
> If that works for everybody else, let's do it!
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 11:22 AM, "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc. via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Chris:
>> 
>> Why not consider a Saturday, August 9?  Most folks don't work on Saturdays and it might be more convenient.  I'll propose 2:00 P.M. Eastern Time.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Olusegun
>> Denver, Colorado 
>> 
>> ---
>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
>> http://www.avast.com
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com


From taiablas at gmail.com  Thu Jul 24 22:49:51 2014
From: taiablas at gmail.com (Tai Blas)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 17:49:51 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CAAP4LJpC+rqh9fe2efGYxidb7DKxB6xHrhS976UL3WyuODG8Lw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAP4LJpC+rqh9fe2efGYxidb7DKxB6xHrhS976UL3WyuODG8Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3DA92463-2E23-4610-AF2F-470D8136E4D0@gmail.com>

I am available that evening 

Tai Tomasi
J.D. Candidate
Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.

> On Jul 24, 2014, at 9:59 AM, "Manners, Derek via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> I'll be on a flight that day back to Cambridge.  It isn't a big deal if I'm
> not on the call but I would enjoy the chance to share my experiences.
> Given that, I'd propose we have it in the evening?  That may also be better
> for others as well as it is a week day.
> 
> Best
> Derek
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw <
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
>> Hello All,
>> 
>> We've discussed a conference call for the LSAT, but the conversation
>> has gone no further. I propose August 7 as a date and will await
>> suggestions as to other dates or possible times. Moreover, I'm willing
>> to set up the call and write a memo of our discussions.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Chris
>> 
>> --
>> Chris K. Stewart
>> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
>> Staff Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
>> Co-President, American Constitution Society
>> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
>> Ph:
>> (502)457-1757
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com

From taiablas at gmail.com  Thu Jul 24 23:06:11 2014
From: taiablas at gmail.com (Tai Blas)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 18:06:11 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <7774E4E8-3000-4423-ADCE-CF6BD7C98E96@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<DEA5A7DBE70C4D7782BDA4F1AC03EC4B@victory2>
	<7E7851A0-05E2-4CE0-93D5-E725C4232445@gmail.com>
	<7774E4E8-3000-4423-ADCE-CF6BD7C98E96@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E6676682-22C9-4BF2-9345-056AF97670F9@gmail.com>

Works for me. 

Tai Tomasi
J.D. Candidate
Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.

> On Jul 24, 2014, at 5:24 PM, Aimee Harwood via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Works for me as well.
> 
> Aimee
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 3:47 PM, philosopher25--- via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello list,
>> Yes, the ninth at 2 PM Eastern time works for me.
>> If that works for everybody else, let's do it!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 11:22 AM, "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc. via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Chris:
>>> 
>>> Why not consider a Saturday, August 9?  Most folks don't work on Saturdays and it might be more convenient.  I'll propose 2:00 P.M. Eastern Time.
>>> 
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Olusegun
>>> Denver, Colorado 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com

From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Fri Jul 25 00:48:28 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Derek Manners)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 20:48:28 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <E6676682-22C9-4BF2-9345-056AF97670F9@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PAtw8bbpB4pnMRfpZhV5ji63kfrDMz4kWZNQErrDp0xZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<DEA5A7DBE70C4D7782BDA4F1AC03EC4B@victory2>
	<7E7851A0-05E2-4CE0-93D5-E725C4232445@gmail.com>
	<7774E4E8-3000-4423-ADCE-CF6BD7C98E96@gmail.com>
	<E6676682-22C9-4BF2-9345-056AF97670F9@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <805055E4-1A65-4B85-9CC6-85A4D60BD9C9@jd16.law.harvard.edu>

Works for me too

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 24, 2014, at 7:06 PM, Tai Blas via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Works for me. 
> 
> Tai Tomasi
> J.D. Candidate
> Email: tai.tomasi8 at gmail.com
> Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse my brevity and any grammatical errors.
> 
>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 5:24 PM, Aimee Harwood via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Works for me as well.
>> 
>> Aimee
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 3:47 PM, philosopher25--- via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello list,
>>> Yes, the ninth at 2 PM Eastern time works for me.
>>> If that works for everybody else, let's do it!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 11:22 AM, "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc. via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello Chris:
>>>> 
>>>> Why not consider a Saturday, August 9?  Most folks don't work on Saturdays and it might be more convenient.  I'll propose 2:00 P.M. Eastern Time.
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> Olusegun
>>>> Denver, Colorado 
>>>> 
>>>> ---
>>>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
>>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/philosopher25%40gmail.com
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/awildheir%40gmail.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/taiablas%40gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu


From chris.stewart at uky.edu  Fri Jul 25 01:11:43 2014
From: chris.stewart at uky.edu (Stewart, Christopher K)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:11:43 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
Message-ID: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>

Hello All,

Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better
day for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that
people email me off list at
chris.stewart at uky.edu
with time questions or confirmations of attendance. I will email
everyone as a group moving forward so that we don't flood this list
with conference-specific emails.

I propose we discuss the following issues:

1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our
individual experiences and recommendations)

2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general
accessible resources)
A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille users
B. For those who use large print

3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the
struggle is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly
everyone struggles?)

4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this
because everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd
at least like to get an overview of individual experiences.)

I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I
have the conference call number and group number, and I'll send that
information out once we've set a definite time.

I look forward to hearing from everyone.

Sincerely,
Chris Stewart


-- 
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
Staff Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
Co-President, American Constitution Society
California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757


From kelbycarlson at gmail.com  Fri Jul 25 01:14:14 2014
From: kelbycarlson at gmail.com (kelby carlson)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:14:14 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPMpJYtJ4fBWkVeJ9KU1tsr6KUrC1OimphOxCZ1sizNTC7XKQw@mail.gmail.com>

I probably won't be able to make it, but will the call be recorded?



On 7/24/14, Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better
> day for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that
> people email me off list at
> chris.stewart at uky.edu
> with time questions or confirmations of attendance. I will email
> everyone as a group moving forward so that we don't flood this list
> with conference-specific emails.
>
> I propose we discuss the following issues:
>
> 1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our
> individual experiences and recommendations)
>
> 2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general
> accessible resources)
> A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille users
> B. For those who use large print
>
> 3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the
> struggle is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly
> everyone struggles?)
>
> 4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this
> because everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd
> at least like to get an overview of individual experiences.)
>
> I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I
> have the conference call number and group number, and I'll send that
> information out once we've set a definite time.
>
> I look forward to hearing from everyone.
>
> Sincerely,
> Chris Stewart
>
>
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
> Staff Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
> Co-President, American Constitution Society
> California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/kelbycarlson%40gmail.com
>


From rothmanjd at gmail.com  Fri Jul 25 01:34:38 2014
From: rothmanjd at gmail.com (Ronza Othman)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:34:38 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007501cfa7a8$99c543a0$cd4fcae0$@gmail.com>

Hi Chris,
Actually, the National Association of Blind Lawyers has decided to host this
call.  You've got some great ideas, and we hope to meet the needs of
everyone on the list.  We have been working to launch a quarterly conference
call to discuss relevant issues in the profession, and we've missed the last
one.  We'll take care of arranging the Conference Bridge and coordinating
logistics.  In addition, we've decided to do two sessions of this call since
there's such tremendous interest.  Details to follow in a separate email.

Thanks,
Ronza


-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Stewart,
Christopher K via blindlaw
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:12 PM
To: blindlaw
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call

Hello All,

Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better day
for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that people
email me off list at chris.stewart at uky.edu with time questions or
confirmations of attendance. I will email everyone as a group moving forward
so that we don't flood this list with conference-specific emails.

I propose we discuss the following issues:

1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our individual
experiences and recommendations)

2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general accessible
resources) A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille users
B. For those who use large print

3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the struggle
is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly everyone
struggles?)

4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this because
everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd at least like
to get an overview of individual experiences.)

I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I have the
conference call number and group number, and I'll send that information out
once we've set a definite time.

I look forward to hearing from everyone.

Sincerely,
Chris Stewart


--
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff Editor,
Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution Society California
Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757

_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmail.com



From rothmanjd at gmail.com  Fri Jul 25 01:45:38 2014
From: rothmanjd at gmail.com (Ronza Othman)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:45:38 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] NABL Blind Justice Seminar: LSAT
Message-ID: <007701cfa7aa$235c8aa0$6a159fe0$@gmail.com>

Blind Justice: The Law School Admissions Test

Introducing the next session in the "Blind Justice" lawyering topics and
skills seminar series, hosted by the National Association of Blind Lawyers.

The next seminar on skills for being successful blind attorneys and law
students will have two sessions.  The first session will take place on
Thursday, August 6, 2014 at 9PM Eastern Time, 6PM Pacific.  The second
session will take place on Saturday, August 9, 2014 at 1PM Eastern, 10AM
Pacific.  Both seminars will take place via teleconference.  Participants
could choose to attend either or both sessions.  

 

Participants will discuss strategies for obtaining reasonable
accommodations, successfully navigating the logic games section, and other
tips and tricks for earning a good score on the exam.

 

To register, please send an email to Ronza Othman at rothmanjd at gmail.com.
Please specify which session you plan to attend or if you want to register
for both sessions.
Once you have registered, you will receive the conference call-in
information.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact Ronza Othman at 708-829-0523
or rothmanjd at gmail.com.

Regards,

The NABL Board





From chris.stewart at uky.edu  Fri Jul 25 01:45:41 2014
From: chris.stewart at uky.edu (Stewart, Christopher K)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:45:41 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <007501cfa7a8$99c543a0$cd4fcae0$@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<007501cfa7a8$99c543a0$cd4fcae0$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAyF1PAcBpsA65pj5HeAq2fz8eCRBgXPO6n=Go0fH6OaW=Q-_w@mail.gmail.com>

The simple fact is there are real students in need of information
sooner rather than later. Much as I appreciate the offer, I would
still welcome anyone to contact me directly with regard to an August 9
call. I particularly urge anyone seeking to take the exam within the
next testing cycle to call in and listen and contribute their
experiences thus far.

Moreover, the sooner there is a concise Fact Sheet or some other sort
of guide for potential blind test takers, the better for everyone. If
you would like to have a conference call later to amend what we've
found, you should of course feel free. However, I can think of no
reason not to act now particularly where accommodated testers must
begin the process so early.

Sincerely,
Chris Stewart



On 7/24/14, Ronza Othman <rothmanjd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> Actually, the National Association of Blind Lawyers has decided to host
> this
> call.  You've got some great ideas, and we hope to meet the needs of
> everyone on the list.  We have been working to launch a quarterly
> conference
> call to discuss relevant issues in the profession, and we've missed the
> last
> one.  We'll take care of arranging the Conference Bridge and coordinating
> logistics.  In addition, we've decided to do two sessions of this call
> since
> there's such tremendous interest.  Details to follow in a separate email.
>
> Thanks,
> Ronza
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Stewart,
> Christopher K via blindlaw
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:12 PM
> To: blindlaw
> Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
>
> Hello All,
>
> Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better day
> for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that people
> email me off list at chris.stewart at uky.edu with time questions or
> confirmations of attendance. I will email everyone as a group moving
> forward
> so that we don't flood this list with conference-specific emails.
>
> I propose we discuss the following issues:
>
> 1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our individual
> experiences and recommendations)
>
> 2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general accessible
> resources) A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille
> users
> B. For those who use large print
>
> 3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the
> struggle
> is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly everyone
> struggles?)
>
> 4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this because
> everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd at least like
> to get an overview of individual experiences.)
>
> I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I have
> the
> conference call number and group number, and I'll send that information out
> once we've set a definite time.
>
> I look forward to hearing from everyone.
>
> Sincerely,
> Chris Stewart
>
>
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff Editor,
> Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution Society California
> Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmail.com
>
>


-- 
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016
Staff Editor, Kentucky Law Journal
Co-President, American Constitution Society
California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757


From rothmanjd at gmail.com  Fri Jul 25 01:49:47 2014
From: rothmanjd at gmail.com (Ronza Othman)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:49:47 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CAAyF1PAcBpsA65pj5HeAq2fz8eCRBgXPO6n=Go0fH6OaW=Q-_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<007501cfa7a8$99c543a0$cd4fcae0$@gmail.com>
	<CAAyF1PAcBpsA65pj5HeAq2fz8eCRBgXPO6n=Go0fH6OaW=Q-_w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <008a01cfa7aa$ba7eba20$2f7c2e60$@gmail.com>

Based on the feedback and information we've received from the members of
this list, we are hosting and organizing the call to incorporate the
information you are seeking at the time and date you suggested (and adding
an additional session that week for those who are unable to make the
Saturday session).  Christopher, can you call me so that we can chat to make
sure your personal ideas are incorporated as best as we can?  I'm at
708-829-0523.  Given that this is a global issue for our members, we decided
that the NABL Board should coordinate this event - not trying to step on
toes but rather give our members the forum you want within the organization
rather than independent of it.  Afterall, we exist to provide resources for
blind attorneys and law students.


Thanks,
Ronza


-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart, Christopher K [mailto:chris.stewart at uky.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:46 PM
To: Ronza Othman
Cc: Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call

The simple fact is there are real students in need of information sooner
rather than later. Much as I appreciate the offer, I would still welcome
anyone to contact me directly with regard to an August 9 call. I
particularly urge anyone seeking to take the exam within the next testing
cycle to call in and listen and contribute their experiences thus far.

Moreover, the sooner there is a concise Fact Sheet or some other sort of
guide for potential blind test takers, the better for everyone. If you would
like to have a conference call later to amend what we've found, you should
of course feel free. However, I can think of no reason not to act now
particularly where accommodated testers must begin the process so early.

Sincerely,
Chris Stewart



On 7/24/14, Ronza Othman <rothmanjd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> Actually, the National Association of Blind Lawyers has decided to 
> host this call.  You've got some great ideas, and we hope to meet the 
> needs of everyone on the list.  We have been working to launch a 
> quarterly conference call to discuss relevant issues in the 
> profession, and we've missed the last one.  We'll take care of 
> arranging the Conference Bridge and coordinating logistics.  In 
> addition, we've decided to do two sessions of this call since there's 
> such tremendous interest.  Details to follow in a separate email.
>
> Thanks,
> Ronza
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
> Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:12 PM
> To: blindlaw
> Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
>
> Hello All,
>
> Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better 
> day for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that 
> people email me off list at chris.stewart at uky.edu with time questions 
> or confirmations of attendance. I will email everyone as a group 
> moving forward so that we don't flood this list with 
> conference-specific emails.
>
> I propose we discuss the following issues:
>
> 1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our 
> individual experiences and recommendations)
>
> 2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general 
> accessible
> resources) A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille 
> users B. For those who use large print
>
> 3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the 
> struggle is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly 
> everyone
> struggles?)
>
> 4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this 
> because everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd 
> at least like to get an overview of individual experiences.)
>
> I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I 
> have the conference call number and group number, and I'll send that 
> information out once we've set a definite time.
>
> I look forward to hearing from everyone.
>
> Sincerely,
> Chris Stewart
>
>
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff 
> Editor, Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution 
> Society California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmai
> l.com
>
>


--
Chris K. Stewart
University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff Editor,
Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution Society California
Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
Ph:
(502)457-1757



From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Fri Jul 25 21:12:19 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:12:19 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] NPRM: DOJ 28 CFR Part 36, CRT Docket No. 126;
 AG Order No. 3449-2014, RIN 1190-AA63, Nondiscrimination on the
 Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations-Movie Theaters;
 Movie Captioning and Audio Description
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928F84A@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A928F84A@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2972705@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


Link:
http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html

Text:

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR Part 36

CRT Docket No. 126; AG Order No. 3449-2014

RIN 1190-AA63

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations-Movie Theaters;

Movie Captioning and Audio Description

AGENCY:
Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division.
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY:
The Department of Justice (Department) is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in order to propose amendments to its regulation for title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which covers public accommodations and commercial facilities, including movie theaters. The Department is proposing to explicitly require movie theaters to exhibit movies with closed captioning and audio description at all times and for all showings whenever movies are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with captioning and audio description unless to do so would result in an undue burden or fundamental alteration. The Department is also proposing to require movie theaters to have a certain number of individual closed captioning and audio description devices unless to do so would result in an undue burden or fundamental alteration. The Department is proposing a six-month compliance date for movie theaters' digital movie screens and is seeking public comment on whether it should adopt a four-year compliance date for movie theaters'analog movie screens or should defer rulemaking on analog screens until a later date.
DATES:
The Department invites written comments from members of the public. Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must be submitted on or before [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Comments received by mail will be considered timely if they are postmarked on or before that date. The electronic Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of that day.
ADDRESSES:
You may submit comments, identified by RIN 1190-AA63, by any one of the following methods:

 *   Federal eRulemaking website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web site's instructions for submitting comments. The Regulations.gov Docket ID is DOJ-CRT-126.
 *   Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885, Fairfax, VA 22031-0885.
 *   Overnight, courier, or hand delivery: Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1425 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 4039, Washington, D.C. 20005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Zita Johnson-Betts, Deputy Section Chief, Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, at (202) 307-0663 (voice or TTY). This is not a toll-free number. Information may also be obtained from the Department's toll-free ADA Information Line at (800) 514-0301 (voice) or (800) 514-0383 (TTY).
You may obtain copies of this NPRM in alternative formats by calling the ADA Information Line at (800) 514-0301 (voice) and (800) 514-0383 (TTY). This NPRM is also available on the Department's Web site at http://www.ada.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Submission of Comments and Posting of Public Comments
You may submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. When submitting comments electronically, you must include DOJ-CRT-126 in the search field, and you must include your full name and address. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption and should be free of any defects or viruses.
Please note that all comments received are considered part of the public record and made available for public inspection online at http://www.regulations.gov. Submission postings will include any personal identifying information (such as your name and address) included in the text of your comment. If you include personal identifying information (such as your name and address), in the text of your comment but do not want it to be posted online, you must include the phrase "PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION" in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also identify all the personal identifying information you want redacted. Similarly, if you submit confidential business information as part of your comment but do not want it to be posted online, you must include the phrase "CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION" in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential business information to be redacted within the comment. If a comment has so much confidential business information that it cannot be effectively redacted, all or part of that comment may not be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
Relationship to Other Laws
The Department of Justice regulation implementing title III, 28 CFR 36.103, provides that except as otherwise provided in part 36, that part shall not be construed to apply a lesser standard than the standards applied under title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791) or the regulations issued by Federal agencies pursuant to that title. See § 36.103(a). In addition, the title III regulation provides that part 36 does not affect the obligations of a recipient of Federal financial assistance to comply with the requirements of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and any implementing regulations issued by Federal agencies. See § 36.103(b). Finally, part 36 does not invalidate or limit the remedies, rights, and procedures of any other Federal, State, or local laws (including State common law) that provide greater or equal protection for the rights of individuals with disabilities or individuals associated with them. See § 36.103(c).
These provisions remain unchanged. Compliance with the Department's title II and title III regulations does not ensure compliance with other Federal statutes.
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Purpose of Proposed Rule
The Department of Justice (Department) is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in order to propose amendments to its regulation implementing title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which covers public accommodations and commercial facilities-including movie theaters-to explicitly require movie theaters to exhibit movies with closed captioning and audio description, as well as to provide individual captioning and audio-description devices for patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. In the movie theater context, "closed captioning" refers to captions that only the patron requesting the closed captions can see because the captions are delivered to the patron at or near the patron's seat. Audio description is a technology that enables individuals who are blind or have low vision to enjoy movies by providing a spoken narration of key visual elements of a visually delivered medium, such as actions, settings, facial expressions, costumes, and scene changes. Audio description can be transmitted to a user's wireless headset through infra-red or FM transmission.
Title III of the ADA contains broad language prohibiting public accommodations from discriminating against individuals with disabilities, 42 U.S.C. 12182(a), as well as more specific statutory provisions intended to counter particular forms of disability-based discrimination by owners, operators, or lessees of public accommodations. Of particular relevance to this rulemaking, covered entities must take "such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently * * * because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services" unless they can show that doing so would result in a fundamental alteration or undue burden. 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii). The Department's regulation implementing title III's auxiliary aid provision reiterates the obligation of covered entities to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities and identifies, among other things, open captioning, closed captioning, and audio recordings, as examples of auxiliary aids and services. 28 CFR 36.303(a)-(c).
Despite movie theaters' title III obligation to provide effective communication to patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision, these individuals are often shut out from the movie-going experience; this exclusion occurs even though the vast majority of motion pictures released by the major domestic movie studios include closed captioning and to a lesser extent, audio description. While there has been an increase in the number of movie theaters exhibiting movies with closed captions and to a much lesser extent, audio description, due in large part to successful disability rights litigation brought by private plaintiffs during the past few years, the availability of movies exhibited with closed captions and audio description varies significantly across the United States depending upon locality and movie theater ownership. As a result, persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision, who represent an ever-increasing proportion of the population, still cannot fully take part in movie-going outings with family or friends, join in social conversations about recent movie releases, or otherwise participate in a meaningful way in this important aspect of American culture.
The ADA requirements for effective communication apply to all public accommodations (including movie theaters) in every jurisdiction in the United States and should be consistently applied. The ADA protects the rights of persons with disabilities throughout the United States; the right to access movies exhibited with closed captioning and audio description should not depend on whether the person who is deaf or hard of hearing or is blind or has low vision resides in a jurisdiction where movie theaters, subject to a consent decree or settlement, exhibit movies with closed captioning or audio description. And, even in jurisdictions where theaters exhibit movies with captioning and audio description, many do not make captioning and audio description available at all movie showings. Moreover, recent technological changes in the movie theater industry-including wide-spread conversion from analog (film) projection to digital cinema systems-make exhibition of captioned and audio-described movies easier and less costly. The Department is thus convinced that regulation is warranted at this time in order to achieve the goals and promise of the ADA.
Major Provisions
The major provisions of the proposed rule can be summarized as follows.
First, as of the rule's effective date, which the Department is proposing to be 6 months after the publication of a final rule in the Federal Register, the NPRM proposes to require movie theaters with digital screens (generally, those exhibiting movies captured on data files stored in a hard drive or flash drive) to exhibit movies with closed captions (although theaters may, at their own discretion, exhibit movies with open captions instead) and audio description, for all screenings when such movies are produced and distributed with these features unless the public accommodation can demonstrate that taking those steps would fundamentally alter the nature of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations being offered or would result in an undue burden, i.e., significant difficulty or expense. Such an across-the-board requirement fulfills the effective communication objective by permitting individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision to fully and equally participate in one of the most quintessential forms of American entertainment-going out to the movies along with the rest of the movie-going public.
In no case would movie theaters be required to create their own captioning or audio descriptions for movies. Rather, whenever the movies that theaters choose to screen are produced and distributed with these accessibility features, movie theaters would be required to ensure that they obtain and then screen those versions. This rule would not prohibit movie theaters from screening movies that are not produced with captions or audio description.
Second, the NPRM does not propose a specific compliance date for analog screens (generally, those exhibiting movies in the traditional form of 35 mm film) in movie theaters. Instead, the Department seeks public comment on two options. Option 1: whether the rule should adopt a delayed compliance date for analog screens four years from the publication of a final rule in the Federal Register. The Department believes that a delayed compliance date would allow any small theaters that remain analog to obtain the necessary resources to purchase the equipment to provide closed captioning and audio description. Option 2: because the state of analog movies is in such flux, whether the Department should defer rulemaking with respect to analog movie screens until a later date.
Third, the NPRM proposes to require movie theaters to have a certain number of individual captioning devices capable of delivering the captions at the seat of the individual and to provide them to patrons upon request. The proposed numbers are based upon the number of seats in the movie theater itself and can be shared among the screens in the theater. Individual captioning devices are a necessary part of the process of delivering closed captions, and this requirement is designed to ensure that there will be sufficient numbers of devices available for use when individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing attend the movies.
Fourth, the NPRM proposes to require movie theaters to have a certain number of devices capable of delivering audio description and to provide them to patrons upon request. The NPRM recognizes that the devices currently required by the ADA for assistive listening often contain an extra channel and therefore can also be used to deliver audio description. The NPRM proposes minimal scoping for audio description listening devices and also permits movie theaters that have two-channel devices for assistive listening to use those devices for audio description in lieu of purchasing additional devices.
Fifth, the NPRM proposes to require that movie theaters ensure that their staff has the capability to operate the equipment to show captions and audio description and to show patrons how to use individual devices.
Finally, the NPRM proposes that movie theaters provide the public with notice about the availability of captions and audio description. This provision is necessary because currently not all movies are produced with captions and audio description, and moviegoers who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision, should have the ability to find out which movies are accessible to them.
As with other effective communication obligations under the ADA, covered entities do not have to comply with these requirements to the extent that they constitute an undue burden or fundamental alteration.
Costs and Benefits
With respect to the costs and benefits of this rule, the Department has prepared an Initial Regulatory Assessment (Initial RA). The Initial RA assesses the likely costs and benefits of the proposed rule. Expected benefits are discussed and likely costs are estimated for all theaters over the projected life of the rule (15 years), as well as for "small businesses" in the movie exhibition industry as part of an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), included therein.
The Initial RA provides estimates of the total costs for two options. Option 1 assumes a compliance date for digital theaters of six months from the publication of the final rule and a compliance date for analog theaters of four years from the publication date of the final rule. Option 2 assumes that the rule will only apply to digital theaters and that application of the rule's requirements to analog theaters will be deferred. For Option 1, the total cost for all theaters over the 15-year period following publication of this rule in final form will likely range from $177.8 million to $225.9 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $219.0 million to $275.7 million when using a 3 percent discount rate, depending on which baseline is used regarding the extent to which theaters are or will soon be providing movie captioning and audio description as proposed in this rule, but independently of this rulemaking.[1]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn1> Under Option 1, the annualized costs range from $19.5 million to $24.8 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $18.3 million to $23.1 million when using a 3 percent discount rate. For Option 2, total costs for all theaters with digital screens over the 15-year period following publication of this rule in final form will likely range from $138.1 million to $186.2 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $169.3 million to $226.0 million when using a 3 percent discount rate, depending on which baseline is used regarding the extent to which theaters are or will soon be providing movie captioning and audio description as proposed in this rule, but independently of this rulemaking.[2]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn2> When annualized, these costs range from $15.2 million to $20.4 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $14.2 million to 18.9 million when using a 3 percent discount rate. In either case, the Initial RA shows that estimated annual costs for this proposed rule would not exceed $100 million in any year (under any of the three baseline scenarios).
Table ES-1: Annualized Costs and Benefits of Proposed Rule (2015 Dollars, 15-year Time Horizon)

7% Discount Rate

3% Discount Rate


Baseline 1 Assumptions (One Screen )

Baseline 2 Assumptions (Litigation-Based)

Baseline 3 Assumptions (NATO Survey Based)

Baseline 1 Assumptions (One Screen )

Baseline 2 Assumptions (Litigation-Based)

Baseline 3 Assumptions (NATO Survey Based)

Costs
(million $)

Option 1 - Four Year Compliance for Analog Screens

$24.8

$21.1

$19.5

$23.1

$19.7

$18.3

Option 2 - Deferred Rulemaking for Analog Screens

$20.4

$16.7

$15.2

$18.9

$15.6

$14.2

Benefits

The proposed rule would address the discriminatory effects of communication barriers at movie theaters encountered by individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision. By ensuring that movie theaters screen those movies that are produced and distributed with the necessary auxiliary aids and services-captioning and audio description-and that theaters provide the individual devices needed to deliver these services to patrons with these particular disabilities, this rule would afford such individuals an equal opportunity to attend movies and follow both the audio and visual aspects of movies exhibited at movie theaters. Although the Department is unable to monetize or quantify the benefits of this proposed rule, it would have important benefits. For example, it would provide people with hearing and vision disabilities better access to the movie viewing experience enjoyed by others; it would allow such persons to attend and enjoy movies with their family members and acquaintances; it would allow people with hearing or vision disabilities to participate in conversations about movies with family members and acquaintances; and it would promote other hard-to-quantify benefits recognized in Executive Order 13563 such as equity, human dignity, and fairness.

Because movie theater complexes vary greatly by number of screens, which significantly impacts overall costs per facility, the Initial RA breaks the movie exhibition industry into four theater types based on size-Megaplexes (16 or more screens), Multiplexes (8-15 screens), Miniplexes (2-7 screens), and Single Screen Theaters-and for Option 1, by digital or analog system. The average capital cost for digital Megaplex theaters in the first year is estimated to total $38,547, while the average capital cost for digital single screen theaters in the first year is estimated to total $3,198. Should the Department proceed under Option 1 and cover analog screens in the final rule, though with a four-year delayed compliance date, per theater costs for analog theaters would be higher than those for digital theaters for each type or size. The first year capital cost for analog single screen theaters is estimated to total $8,172. The first year capital costs for digital single screen theaters would average $3,198.
The individuals who will directly benefit from this rule are those persons with hearing or vision disabilities who, as a result of this rule, would be able for the first time to attend movies with closed captioning or audio description in theaters across the country on a consistent basis. Individuals who will indirectly benefit from this rule are the family and friends of persons with hearing and vision disabilities who would be able to share the movie-going experience more fully with their friends or loved ones with hearing and vision disabilities.
The benefits of this rule are difficult to quantify for multiple reasons. The Department has not been able to locate robust data on the rate at which persons with disabilities currently go to movies shown in movie theaters. In addition, as a result of this rule, the following number of persons will change by an unknown amount: (1) the number of persons with disabilities who will newly go to movies, (2) the number of persons with disabilities who will go to movies more often, (3) the number of persons who will go to the movies as part of a larger group that includes a person with a disability, and (4) the number of persons with disabilities who would have gone to the movies anyway but under the rule will have a fuller and more pleasant experience. In addition, the Department does not know precisely how many movie screens currently screen movies with closed captioning and audio description, or how many people with hearing or vision disabilities currently have consistent access to movie theaters that provide closed captioning and audio description. Finally, the Department is not aware of any peer-reviewed academic or professional studies that monetize or quantify the societal benefit of providing closed captioning and audio description at movie theaters.
Data on movie-going patterns of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision is very limited, making estimations of demand very difficult. However, numerous public comments suggest that many persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision do not go to the movies at all or attend movies well below the national average of 4.1 annual admissions per person because of the lack of auxiliary aids and services that would allow them to understand and enjoy the movie.
Though we cannot confidently estimate the likely number of people who would directly benefit from this proposed rule, we have reviewed data on the number of people with hearing or vision disabilities in the United States. The Census Bureau estimates that 3.3 percent of the U.S. population has difficulty seeing, which translates into a little more than eight million individuals in 2010, and a little more than two million of those had "severe"difficulty seeing.[3]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn3> At the same time, the Census Bureau estimates that 3.1 percent of people had difficulty hearing, which was a little more than 7.5 million individuals in 2010, and approximately one million of them having "severe" difficulty hearing. Not all of these people would benefit from this proposed rule. For example, some people's hearing or vision disability may not be such that they would need closed captioning or audio description. Some people with hearing or visions disabilities may not want to use the equipment for a variety of reasons. Others would not attend public screenings of movies even if theaters provided closed captioning and audio description simply because they do not enjoy going out to the movies-just as is the case among persons without disabilities.[4]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn4> Some people with hearing or vision disabilities may already have consistent access to theaters that screen movies with closed captioning and audio description. And some theaters may not provide closed captioning and audio description for all their movies because it would be an undue burden under the ADA to do so.
In addition to the direct beneficiaries of the proposed rule discussed above, others may be indirect beneficiaries of this rule. Family and friends of persons with these disabilities who wish to go to the movies as a shared social experience will now have greater opportunities to do so. The Department received numerous comments from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision in response to its 2010 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Movie Captioning and Video Description in Movie Theaters describing how they were unable to take part in the movie-going experience with their friends and family because of the unavailability of captioning or audio description. Many individuals felt that this not only affected their ability to socialize and fully take part in family and social outings, but also deprived them of the opportunity to meaningfully engage in the discourse that often surrounds movie attendance. (See the Initial RA, Section 5 (Benefits) for more details and description of the potential benefits of this proposed rule.) Of perhaps greater significance to the discussion of the benefits of this rule, however, are issues relating to fairness, equity, and equal access, all of which are extremely difficult to monetize, and the Department has not been able to effectively quantify and place a dollar value on those benefits. Regardless, the Department believes the non-quantifiable benefits justify the costs of requiring captioning and audio description at movie theaters nationwide.
In keeping with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Initial RA examined the economic impact of the proposed rule on small businesses in the movie exhibition industry. The current size standard for a small movie theater business is $35.5 million dollars in annual revenue. In 2007, the latest year for which detailed breakouts by industry and annual revenue are available, approximately 98 percent of movie theater firms met the standard for small business, and these firms managed approximately 53 percent of movie theater establishments.[5]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn5> The IRFA estimates the average initial capital costs per-firm for firms that display digital or analog movies under Option 1 and for firms that display digital movies under Option 2. The average costs for small firms (which have a proportionately higher number of Single Screens and Miniplexes) were between approximately 0.7 percent to 2.1 percent of their average annual receipts for firms with digital theaters, and between approximately 2.0 percent to 5.7 percent of average annual receipts for firms with analog theaters. The Department has determined that this proposed rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
The Department has used the IRFA to examine other ways, if possible, to accomplish the Department's goals with fewer burdens on small businesses. Based on its assessment, the Department has decided to seek public comment on two options: one that would adopt a four-year compliance date for theaters' analog screens (Option 1), and the other that would defer application of the rule's requirements to movie theaters' analog screens and consider additional rulemaking at a later date (Option 2).
II. Background
A. Movie Basics, Captioning, and Audio Description Generally
The very first movies were silent films. Talking pictures, or "talkies," added sound as a separate component in the mid-to-late 1920s. Today, there are two formats for exhibiting movies in theaters: analog movies and digital movies. The term analog movie describes what is generally understood as a movie exhibited in a traditional film form (generally 35 mm film). Currently, while the cinematography portion of analog movies is exhibited in a traditional film format, the sound portion of analog movies is generally provided in a digital format. Five to six reels of film are used for a typical two-hour long analog movie. These reels must be physically delivered to each movie theater exhibiting the movie. Digital sound accompanying analog movies is captured on CD-ROMs or optically or digitally on the film itself. Digital sound is synchronized to the visual images on the screen of the analog movie by a mechanism called a reader head, which reads a time code track printed on the film.
A digital movie (digital cinema), by contrast, captures images, data, and sound on data files as a digital "package" that is stored on a hard drive or a flash drive. Digital movies are physically delivered to movie theaters on high resolution DVDs or removable or external hard drives, or can be transmitted to movie theaters' servers via Internet, fiber-optic, or satellite networks. Digital production, distribution, and exhibition are seen as having many advantages over analog film, including better and longer lasting image quality, availability of higher resolution images, lower production and distribution costs, ease of distribution, availability of enhanced effects such as 3D, ease of exhibition of live events or performances, and greater flexibility in arranging or increasing show times to accommodate unanticipated audience demand.
The movie picture production industry is in the midst of a large and transformative conversion to digital cinema. This conversion is viewed by the industry as one of the most profound advances in motion picture production and technology of the last 100 years. On May 14, 2013, an industry representative testified before Congress that the industry had nearly completed its transition to digital distribution and projection and that approximately 88 percent of all movie theater screens (nearly 35,000 screens) had already converted to digital. Testimony of John Fithian, President and CEO of the National Association of Theater Owners, Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pension (May 14, 2013), available at http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Fithian.pdf (last visited July 14, 2014).
Captioning makes movies accessible to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and who are unable to benefit from the use of the assistive listening systems required for movie theaters to amplify sound. There are, at present, two types of captions available for movies: open captions and closed captions. The terms "closed captioning" and "open captioning" have had special meaning in the movie theater context and differ from the way the terms are used in other settings (e.g., television). In the movie theater context, the movie industry and the courts have used the term "closed captioning" to mean that when the closed captions are in use, only the patron requesting the closed captions can see the captions because the captions are delivered to the patron at or near the patron's seat. The term"open captioning" has been used in the movie theater context to refer to the circumstances when the theater exhibits the captions so that all patrons see the captions on or near the screen. By contrast, in the television context, the term "closed captioning" has been used to refer to captions that can be seen on the screen when turned on by the viewer. In order to avoid confusion between the specific requirements in this proposed rule and the ways the terms open and closed captioning have historically been used in other settings, the Department proposes using the terms "closed movie captioning" and "open movie captioning" in the regulatory text to specifically refer to captions that are provided in movie theaters. However, in the preamble, when discussing the history of captioning, the state of captioning technology, the legislative history of the ADA, and court decisions, the Department will continue to use the terms "closed captioning" and "open captioning" because such terms are used in the definition of auxiliary aids at 28 CFR 36.303(b).
Open movie captions are similar to subtitles in that the text of the dialogue is visible to everyone in the movie theater. Unlike subtitles, open movie captions also describe other sounds and sound making (e.g., sound effects, music, and the character who is speaking) in an on-screen text format. Open captions in movies were sometimes referred to as "burned-in" or"hardcoded" captions because they were burned in or incorporated into the film. However, new open-captioning technology enables studios to superimpose captions without making a burned-in copy or having to deliver a special version of the movie. Currently, some movie theaters exhibit open-captioned films at certain limited showings.
Closed movie captioning, as that term is used in the regulatory text of this NPRM, refers to the display of the written text of the dialogue and other sounds or sound making only to those individuals who request it. When requested, the captions are delivered via individual captioning devices used by patrons at their seats.
Audio description[6]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn6> is a technology that enables individuals who are blind or have low vision to enjoy movies by providing a spoken narration of key visual elements of a visually delivered medium, such as actions, settings, facial expressions, costumes, and scene changes. Audio description fills in information about the visual content of a movie where there are no corresponding audio elements in the film. It requires the creation of a separate script that is written by specially-trained writers and recorded on an audiotape or CD that is synchronized with the film as it is projected. The oral delivery of the script is transmitted to the user through infra-red or FM transmission to wireless headsets.
Movie studios decide which movies to provide with captioning and audio description and then arrange to have the captions and audio description produced. Movie studios include these auxiliary aids in movies before the movies are distributed to movie theaters and do not charge movie theaters for this service. Movie studios are increasing the numbers of movies produced with captioning in large part because in 1997 the Federal Communications Commission published regulations requiring programming (including movies) shown on television to be captioned. See 47 CFR part 79.
Movie theaters are defined in the proposed rule to include only facilities used primarily for the purpose of showing movies to the public for a fee. As of the end of 2011 there were nearly 39,000 indoor movie screens in the United States and approximately 600 drive-in movie screens. See National Association of Theater Owners, Number of U.S. Movie Screens, available at http://natoonline.org/data/us-movie-screens/ (last visited July 14, 2014). Altogether, the four largest movie theater chains based on screen count-Regal Entertainment Group, AMC Entertainment, Inc., Cinemark USA, Inc., and Carmike Cinemas, Inc.-own or operate approximately 18,000 screens. As of 2010, the top ten domestic movie theater chains had 55 percent of the movie screens in the United States and Canada.[7]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn7> According to comments submitted by the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO) in response to the Department's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Movie Captioning and Video Description (2010 ANPRM), 75 FR 43467 (July 26, 2010) (discussed below), as of 2010, there were approximately 83 movie theater companies in the United States that own or operate 50 or more screens and, in the aggregate, these companies operate 30,432 screens in the United States. Of the additional 931 movie theater companies that own or operate fewer than 50 screens, 450 operate four screens or fewer, and 362 owners operate one site with one or two screens.
Moreover, the number of small movie theater facilities continues to decline. Single screen and Miniplex (between two and seven screens) theaters steadily declined from 2007 to 2010, while the number of Multiplex (8-15 screens) and Megaplex (16 or more screens) theaters increased over that same time period. See Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA),[8]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn8>Theatrical Market Statistics (2011), available at http://www.bumpercarfilms.com/assets/downloads/movies.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014). The decline in the number of small independently owned theaters is expected to accelerate as a result of the significant decrease anticipated in the availability of first-run films in analog format, as the majority of these small independently owned theaters are analog theaters. In 2011, the head of the MPAA was reported to have predicted that analog films would disappear in less than three years. See Tim O'Reiley, Theater Official Optimistic Despite Attendance Slump, Las Vegas Review Journal (March 19, 2011), available at http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/theater-official-optimistic-despite-attendance-slump(last visited July 14, 2014). Similarly, at the spring 2013 CinemaCon industry convention, an industry analyst stated that by the end of 2015, analog film will no longer exist in cinemas, and it is likely that production of analog film in the United States will end by the end of 2013. See Lyndsey Hewitt,Local Theaters Face Tough Times as 35 mm Faces Extinction, Sun Gazette.com (July 11, 2013), available at http://www.sungazette.com/page/content.detail/id/594504/Local-Theaters-Face-Tough-Times-as-35-mm-faces-extinction.html?nav=5016(last visited July 14, 2014). Consequently, some, if not most, small independently owned theaters will likely have to close if they cannot afford to convert their projection systems from analog to digital. See also Colin Covert, Final reel plays amid digital conversion, Star Tribune (Aug. 27, 2012), available at http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/movies/167253335.html?refer=y(last visited July 14, 2014).
Despite the recent economic downturn, movies continue to be a major source of entertainment in the United States. In 2012, moviegoers in the United States and Canada bought a record $10.8 billion in movie tickets, with the largest number of tickets (1.36 billion) sold in three years. Motion Picture Association of America, Theatrical Market Statistics at 4 (2012), available at http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2012-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-Report.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014). Movie theaters continue to draw more people than all theme parks and major U.S. sporting events combined. Id. at 10.
B. Legal Authority to Require Captioning and Audio Description
1. The ADA
On July 26, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed into law the ADA, a comprehensive civil rights law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability. The ADA broadly protects the rights of individuals with disabilities in employment, access to State and local government services, places of public accommodation, transportation, and other important areas of American life. The ADA also requires, in pertinent part, newly designed and constructed or altered public accommodations and commercial facilities to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.
Title III of the ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in the "full and equal enjoyment" of places of public accommodation (privately operated entities whose operations affect commerce and that fall into one of twelve categories listed in the ADA, such as restaurants, movie theaters, schools, day care facilities, recreational facilities, and doctors'offices) and requires newly constructed or altered places of public accommodation--as well as commercial facilities (privately owned, nonresidential facilities such as factories, warehouses, or office buildings)--to comply with the ADA Standards. 42 U.S.C. 12181-12189. Title III of the ADA includes movie theaters within its definition of places of public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. 12181(7)(C). Movie studios and other entities that produce movies to be shown in theaters are not public accommodations by virtue of the making of movies, and therefore are not covered by title III in their production of movies.
Title III makes it unlawful to discriminate against an individual on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. 12182(a). Moreover, title III prohibits public accommodations such as movie theaters from affording an unequal or lesser service to individuals or classes of individuals with disabilities than is offered to other individuals. 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(1)(A)(ii). Title III requires public accommodations to take "such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently * * * because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, unless the entity can demonstrate that taking such steps would fundamentally alter the nature of the good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation being offered or would result in an undue burden."[9]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn9> 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii). The statute defines auxiliary aids and services to include "qualified interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments" and"taped texts, or other effective methods of making visually delivered materials available to individuals with visual impairments." 42 U.S.C. 12103(1)(A)-(B).
2. The ADA Title III Regulation[10]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn10>
The Department of Justice's regulation implementing title III of the ADA provides additional examples of auxiliary aids and services that are required by the statute. The regulation lists open and closed captioning and audio recordings and other effective methods of making visually-delivered materials available to individuals with visual impairments as examples of auxiliary aids and services that should be provided by public accommodations. 28 CFR 36.303(b)(1)-(2). This list was revised in 2010 to reflect changes in technology and the auxiliary aids and services commonly used by individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. 75 FR 56236, 56253-56254 (Sept. 15, 2010). The title III regulation reiterates the requirement of the statute, stating that a public accommodation shall take those steps that may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated, or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, unless the public accommodation can demonstrate that providing such aids and services would fundamentally alter the nature of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations being offered or would result in an undue burden. 28 CFR 36.303(a). The title III regulation reflects that the overarching objective and obligation imposed by the auxiliary aids and services requirement is that a public accommodation must furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities. 28 CFR 36.303(c)(1). The type of auxiliary aid or service necessary to ensure effective communication varies in accordance with the method of communication used by the individual; the nature, length, and complexity of the communication involved; and the context in which the communication is taking place. 28 CFR 36.303(c)(1)(ii). Moreover, in order to be effective, auxiliary aids and services must be provided in accessible formats and in a timely manner. Id. For individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and are prevented from being able to effectively use the assistive listening receivers currently provided in movie theaters to amplify sound, the only auxiliary aids presently available that would effectively communicate the dialogue and sounds in a movie are captioning or sign language interpreting. Likewise, for individuals who are blind or who have very low vision, the only auxiliary aid presently available that would effectively communicate the visual components of a movie is audio description.
As stated above, a public accommodation is relieved of its obligation to provide a particular auxiliary aid (but not all auxiliary aids), if to do so would result in an undue burden or a fundamental alteration. To that end, the Department's title III regulation specifically defines undue burden as "significant difficulty or expense" and, emphasizing the flexible and individualized nature of any such defense, lists five factors that must be considered when determining whether an action would constitute an undue burden. See 28 CFR 36.104. These factors include: (1) the nature and cost of the action; (2) the overall financial resources of the site or sites involved in the action; the number of persons employed at the site; the effect on expenses and resources; legitimate safety requirements that are necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention measures; or the impact otherwise of the action upon the operation of the site; (3) the geographic separateness, and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site or sites in question, to any parent corporation or entity; (4) if applicable, the overall financial resources of any parent corporation or entity; the overall size of the parent corporation or entity with respect to the number of its employees; and the number, type, and location of its facilities; and (5) if applicable, the type of operation or operations of any parent corporation or entity, including the composition, structure, and functions of the workforce of the parent corporation or entity. Id. The undue burden defense entails a fact-specific examination of the cost of a specific action and the specific circumstances of a particular public accommodation. This defense also is designed to ensure that the needs of small businesses, as well as large businesses, are addressed and protected.
The Department defines fundamental alteration as a"modification that is so significant that it alters the essential nature of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations offered." U.S. Department of Justice, Americans with Disabilities Act ADA Title III Technical Assistance Manual Covering Public Accommodations and Commercial FacilitiesIII-4.3600, available at http://www.ada.gov/taman3.html (last visited July 14, 2014).
If a provision of a particular auxiliary aid or service by a public accommodation would result in a fundamental alteration or an undue burden, the public accommodation is not relieved of its obligations to provide auxiliary aids and services. The public accommodation is still required to provide an alternative auxiliary aid or service, if one exists, that would not result in such an alteration or burden but would nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, individuals with disabilities receive the goods and services offered by the public accommodation. 28 CFR 36.303(g). It is the Department's view that it would not be a fundamental alteration of the business of showing movies in theaters to exhibit movies with closed captions and audio descriptions in order to provide effective communication to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision.
3. The Legislative History of the ADA
While the ADA itself contains no explicit language regarding captioning (or audio description) in movie theaters, the legislative history of title III states that "[o]pen captioning * * * of feature films playing in movie theaters, is not required by this legislation. Filmmakers are, however, encouraged to produce and distribute open-captioned versions of films, and theaters are encouraged to have at least some pre-announced screenings of a captioned version of feature films." H.R. Rep. No. 101-485, pt. 2, at 108 (1990); S. Rep. No. 101-116, at 64 (1989).[11]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn11> Congress was silent on the question of closed captions in movie theaters, a technology not yet developed for use in movie theaters, but it acknowledged that closed captions might be an effective auxiliary aid and service for making aurally delivered information available to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. See H.R. Rep. No. 101-485, pt. 2, at 107. Importantly, the House Committee stated that "technological advances can be expected to further enhance options for making meaningful and effective opportunities available to individuals with disabilities. Such advances may require public accommodations to provide auxiliary aids and services in the future which today would not be required because they would be held to impose undue burdens on such entities." Id. at 108.[12]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn12> Similarly, in 1991, when issuing its original title III regulation, the Department stated in preamble language that "[m]ovie theaters are not required * * * to present open-captioned films," but the Department was silent as to closed captioning. 56 FR 35544, 35567 (July 26, 1991). The Department also noted, however, that "other public accommodations that impart verbal information through soundtracks on films, video tapes, or slide shows are required to make such information accessible to persons with hearing impairments. Captioning is one means to make the information accessible to individuals with disabilities." Id.
The legislative history of the ADA and the Department's commentary in the preamble to the 1991 regulation make clear that although Congress was not requiring open captioning of movies in 1990, it was leaving open the door for the Department to require captioning in the future as the technology developed. Congress did not specifically mention audio description in the legislative history; however, audio description clearly falls within the type of auxiliary aid contemplated by the ADA. Moreover, given the present state of technology, the Department believes that mandatory requirements for captioning and audio description in movie theaters fit comfortably within the meaning of the statutory text.
4. Federal Appellate Case Law Addressing Captioning and Audio Description
In April 2010, the first and only Federal appellate court to squarely address the question of whether captioning and audio description are required in movie theaters under the ADA determined that the ADA required movie theater owner and operator Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc., and its affiliates, to screen movies with closed captioning and descriptive narration (audio description) unless such owners and operators could demonstrate that to do so would amount to a fundamental alteration or undue burden. Arizona v. Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc., 603 F.3d 666, 675 (9th Cir. 2010). The Ninth Circuit held that because closed captioning and audio descriptions are correctly classified as "auxiliary aids and services," a movie theater may be required to provide them under the ADA, and thus, the lower court erred in holding that these services fell outside the scope of the ADA. Id. (citing 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A); 28 CFR 36.303).[13]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn13>
Representatives of the movie industry (movie studios and movie theater owners and operators) who commented on the 2010 ANPRM contended that exhibiting captioning is a fundamental alteration of its services. The Department does not agree with that assertion. As the Department asserted in its amicus brief filed in the Harkins case, exhibiting movies with captioning and audio description does not fundamentally alter the nature of the service provided by movie theaters. The service movie theaters provide is screening or exhibiting movies. The use of auxiliary aids to make that service available to those who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision does not change that service. Rather, the provision of auxiliary aids such as captioning and audio description are the means by which these individuals gain access to the movie theaters' services and therefore achieve the "full and equal enjoyment," 42 U.S.C. 12182(a), of the screening of movies. See Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Appellants and Urging Reversal at 15-16, Harkins Amusement, supra, (9th Cir. Feb. 6, 2009) (No. 08-16075).
C. Need for Department Action
1. Importance of Movies in American Culture
Going to the movies is a quintessential American experience. In any given month, over 56 million adults (roughly 26 percent of the adult population) make a trip to a movie theater to take in a movie. See Experian Marketing Services, 2010 American Movie-Goer Consumer Report, available at http://www.experian.com/blogs/marketing-forward/2010/02/20/2010-american-movie-goer-consumer-report/(last visited July 14, 2014). Going to the movies is also an important social experience and pastime of teenagers and young adults. And while teenagers and young adults are more likely to go to the movies than older adults, adults over 50 outnumber young adults when it comes to raw number of moviegoers. Id. Moreover, going to the movies is also an important part of the American family experience. Long holiday weekends offer the movie industry some of the biggest box offices sales as families gather for the holidays and head out to the theaters together.
Movies are a part of our shared cultural experience, "water cooler" talk, and the subject of lunch-time conversations. The Supreme Court observed over 60 years ago that motion pictures "are a significant medium for the communication of ideas" and "may affect public attitudes and behavior in a variety of ways, ranging from direct espousal of a political or social doctrine to subtle shaping of thought which characterizes all artistic expression. The importance of motion pictures as an organ of public opinion is not lessened by the fact that they are designed to entertain as well as to inform." Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495, 501 (1952). When individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision have the opportunity to attend movies that they can actually understand because of the use of captions or audio description, they are exposed to new ideas and gain knowledge that contributes to the development of their communication and literacy.
The Department received numerous comments from individuals with these disabilities in response to its 2010 ANPRM describing how they were unable to take part in the movie-going experience with their friends and family because of the unavailability of captioning or audio descriptions. Many individuals felt that this not only affected their ability to socialize and fully take part in group or family outings, but also deprived them of the opportunity to meaningfully engage in the discourse that often surrounds movie attendance.
Commenters who have some functional degree of hearing, like those who use hearing aids or cochlear implants, explained that going to the movies is frustrating and unenjoyable for them. One commenter who wears a hearing aid and cannot benefit from assistive listening receivers currently provided in movie theaters said she often misses half the plot when she goes to a movie and has to rent the movie when it comes out on DVD so she can turn on the captions and learn what she has missed. Several other commenters also indicated that the assistive listening receivers available at movie theaters were only suitable for individuals with mild to moderate hearing loss.
2. Numbers of Individuals with Hearing and Vision Disabilities
According to 2010 census data, 7.6 million people reported that they experienced a hearing difficulty (defined as experiencing deafness or having difficulty hearing a normal conversation, even when wearing a hearing aid). Of those individuals, 1.1 million reported having a severe difficulty hearing. In addition, 8.1 million people reported having some degree of difficulty seeing (defined as experiencing blindness or having difficulty seeing words or letters in ordinary newsprint even when normally wearing glasses or contact lenses). Of those individuals, 2.0 million reported they were blind or unable to see. See U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, P70-131, Americans with Disabilities: 2010 Household Economic Studies at 8 (2012), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf (last visited July 14, 2014). For people aged 65 or older, Census data indicated that 4.2 million had difficulty hearing (as defined by the Census), and 3.8 million reported having difficulty seeing (as defined by the Census). Id. As stated above, for several reasons it is unlikely that all people who reported having a vision or hearing disability to the Census would benefit from this rule. However, hearing and vision loss are highly correlated with aging, and as the U.S. population ages,[14]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn14> the number of individuals with hearing or vision loss is projected to increase significantly. Research indicates that the number of Americans with a hearing loss has doubled during the past 30 years. See American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, The Prevalence and Incidence of Hearing Loss in Adults, available at http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/disorders/prevalence_adults.htm(last visited July 14, 2014). Experts predict that by 2030, severe vision loss will double along with the country's aging population. See American Foundation for the Blind, Aging and Vision Loss Fact Sheet, available athttp://www.afb.org/section.aspx?FolderID=3&SectionID=44&TopicID=252&DocumentID=3374(last visited July 14, 2014). This increase will likely lead to a corresponding increase in the number of people who will need captioning or audio description. Not all these individuals will necessarily take advantage of the movie captioning and audio description that would be provided under this proposed rule, but a significant portion of this population would be eligible to directly benefit from this proposed rule (see, infra, section VI.A.3 for a more detailed discussion of the population eligible to receive benefits).
The Department believes that captioning will be used by some persons with moderate hearing loss as well as persons with severe hearing loss or who are profoundly deaf. Many individuals with hearing loss have difficulty discriminating among competing sounds in the movie and understanding what they hear, even if they can hear those sounds. Sounds from other patrons can also interfere with the ability of a patron with partial hearing loss to catch all the dialogue in a movie. Other individuals have difficulty understanding what is being said if the actors speak with foreign accents or have poor enunciation, and those patrons who rely even partly on lip reading will miss some dialogue because they cannot always see the actor's face. Individuals with hearing loss who have some level of improved hearing comprehension aided by hearing aids, middle ear implants, and cochlear implants, may also experience the same difficulty discriminating among competing sounds in the movie environment as those individuals with unaided partial hearing loss.[15]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn15> It is critical that all of these individuals are not shut out of an emblematic part of our culture.
3. Voluntary Compliance
Some movie industry commenters asserted that because Congress suggested a voluntary approach to accessibility for exhibiting movies in the 1989 and 1990 legislative history, when only burned-in open captions on separate prints of film were available, the Department should refrain from regulating in this area now and should simply continue to rely on voluntary compliance by the movie theaters. However, since that time, the technology to display open captions has evolved significantly and closed captioning technologies have been developed. Both of these developments are examples of the types of "technological advances" that have enhanced "options for making meaningful and effective opportunities available to individuals with disabilities." H.R. Rep. No. 101-485, pt. 2, at 107. Commenters on the 2010 ANPRM advised the Department that despite these technological advances, even at that time, few movie theaters showed movies with captioning and audio description. In addition, these commenters advised the Department that in their experience, many theaters that had the capacity to show movies with captioning and audio description only did so for selected films shown at intermittent times.
In the three years since the Department last received public comment on these issues after the publication of its 2010 ANPRM (see discussion below), the number of movie theaters that are showing movies with closed captioning and audio description has increased as well as the times those captioned and audio described movies are shown each week. This described increase is attributable in some ways to settlements of Federal or State disability rights lawsuits brought by private plaintiffs or State attorneys general against individual movie theater companies in particular jurisdictions within the United States.[16]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn16> Despite the success of private litigation in some areas of the country, closed captions and audio description are still not available for movies produced and distributed with these features at all theaters across the United States. The Department believes that access to movies for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision should not depend upon where they live.[17]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn17>
Consequently, the Department believes it is in the interest of both the movie theater industry and persons with disabilities to have consistent ADA requirements for movie captioning and audio description throughout the United States and that this is best accomplished through revising the ADA title III regulation as proposed in this NPRM. The Department is persuaded that it should move forward with a regulation requiring captioning and audio descriptions so that the current and ever increasing numbers of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision and who are unable to enjoy the goods and services offered by movie theaters can participate in this facet of American life.
D. The Department's Rulemaking History Regarding Captioning and Audio Description
1. Rulemaking History Prior to the 2010 ANPRM
On September 30, 2004, the Department published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2004 ANPRM) to begin the process of updating the 1991 title II and title III regulations to adopt revised ADA Standards based on the relevant parts of the 2004 Americans with Disabilities and Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines (2004 ADA/ABA Guidelines). 69 FR 58768. When the Department issued the 2004 ANPRM, it did not identify movie captioning or audio description as potential areas of regulation, but several commenters requested that the Department consider regulating in these areas.
Keeping in mind that the ADA's legislative history made clear that the ADA ought not be interpreted so narrowly or rigidly that new technologies are excluded, as the Department became aware of innovations in the field of captioning and audio description technology, it began to contemplate how these technologies might be incorporated into its ADA rules. The need for advancement in the area of access to movie theaters was necessary because assistive listening systems in movie theaters could not be used to effectively convey the audio content of movies for individuals who are deaf or who have severe or profound hearing loss. Additionally, there were no auxiliary aids being provided to individuals who are deaf to access the sound content of the movie or to individuals who are blind or have low vision to access the visual content of the movie. Accordingly, the Department decided to address the topic of requiring closed captioning and audio description (referred to as narrative description) at movie theaters in its June 17, 2008, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2008 NPRM). 73 FR 34508, 34530. In the 2008 NPRM, the Department stated that it was considering options under which it might require movie theaters to exhibit movies that are captioned for patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing and provide audio description for patrons who are blind or have low vision.
The 2008 NPRM did not propose any specific regulatory language with regard to movie captioning or audio description, but asked whether, within a year of the revised regulation's effective date, all new movies should be exhibited with captions and audio description at every showing or whether it would be more appropriate to require captions and audio description less frequently. The preamble made clear that the Department did not intend to specify which types of captioning to provide and stated that such decisions would be left to the discretion of the movie theaters. The Department received many comments in response to its 2008 NPRM questions from individuals with disabilities, organizations representing individuals with disabilities, nonprofit organizations, state-governmental entities, and representatives from the movie industry (movie studios and movie theaters).
Individuals with disabilities, advocacy groups, a representative from a nonprofit organization, and representatives of state governments, including 11 State attorneys general, overwhelmingly supported issuance of a regulation requiring movie theaters to exhibit captioned and audio-described movies at all showings unless doing so would result in an undue burden or fundamental alteration. These groups noted that although the technology to exhibit movies with captions and audio description has been in existence for about 10 years, most movie theaters still were not exhibiting movies with captioning and audio description. As a result, these groups indicated that they believed regulatory action should not be delayed until the conversion to digital cinema had been completed.
Representatives from the movie industry strongly urged the Department not to issue a regulation requiring captioning, or if it did so, to delay the effective date so as to coincide with the completion of conversion to digital cinema. They also objected to any requirement regarding audio description at movie theaters. Industry commenters also said that the cost of obtaining the equipment necessary to display closed-captioned and audio-described movies would constitute an undue burden.
For a more detailed discussion of the comments received in response to the 2008 NPRM, see 2010 ANPRM, 75 FR 43467 (July 26, 2010).
2. The 2010 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The Department was not persuaded that strides made in making captioning and audio description technology available to moviegoers with disabilities were sufficient to make regulatory action in this area unnecessary. However, rather than issue a final rule, the Department issued a supplemental Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2010 ANPRM) on July 26, 2010, 75 FR 43467, for three reasons. First, the Department wished to obtain more information regarding several issues raised by commenters that were not addressed in the 2008 NPRM. Second, the Department sought public comment on several technical questions that arose out of comments on the 2008 NPRM. Finally, in the years since issuance of the 2008 NPRM, the Department became aware that movie theaters, particularly major movie theater chains, either had entered into, or had plans to enter into agreements with the movie studios to underwrite the conversion to digital cinema. During that same time period, however, the United States' economy and the profitability of many public accommodations experienced significant setbacks. The Department, among other things, wished to gather more information about the status of digital conversion, including projections about when movie theaters, both large and small, expected to exhibit movies using digital cinema, the percentage of movie screens expected to be converted to digital cinema by year, and any relevant protocols, standards, and equipment that had been developed for captioning and audio description for digital cinema. In addition, the Department wanted to learn whether other technologies (e.g., 3D) had developed or were in the process of development that either would replace or augment digital cinema or make any regulatory requirements for captioning and audio description more difficult or expensive to implement.
In the 2010 ANPRM, the Department explained that it was considering phasing in a requirement that 50 percent of movie screens offer captioning and audio description over a five-year period. The Department did not propose any regulatory language in the ANPRM.
In order to gather the necessary information and to determine how best to frame the regulation, the Department posed 26 questions in its 2010 ANPRM. These questions were divided into six general categories: coverage of any proposed rule; transition to digital cinema; equipment and technology for both analog and digital cinema movies; notice; training; and cost and benefits of captioning and audio description.
The Department conducted three public hearings to receive testimony on the 2010 ANPRM: the first in Chicago, Illinois, on November 18, 2010; the second in Washington, DC, on December 16, 2010; and the final hearing in San Francisco, California, on January 10, 2011. Each hearing included a full schedule of presenters, and many individuals came to listen to the various presentations.[18]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn18> These public hearings were rebroadcast on-demand through the end of the comment period (January 24, 2011) and were streamed live on the Web to viewers across the country.
The number of comments submitted by the public in response to this ANPRM was extraordinary-the Department received over 1150 comments. Commenters included hundreds of individuals, both with and without disabilities, advocacy groups representing individuals with disabilities, 13 State attorneys general, movie industry representatives, and other organizations. Industry commenters asked that the Department not regulate at that time or, in the alternative, require that only 25 percent of movie screens that have converted to digital have equipment to display captioning or audio description. However, almost all other commenters supported a regulation requiring exhibition of movies with captioning and audio description. Significantly, even though the Department did not propose that captioning and audio description be provided at all showings, the vast majority of commenters who discussed this subject advocated that the Department do just that. In addition, most of these commenters stated that such a requirement should be implemented immediately rather than phased in over a five-year period. Industry commenters pointed out that rolling out captioning and audio description at 20 percent per year over a five-year period would be difficult to implement and that they supported a five-year compliance schedule.
III. General Issues
A. Current State of the Technology for Exhibiting Movies with Captioning and Audio Description and Availability of Product
1. Captioning and Audio Description for Analog Movies
It is the Department's understanding, based upon independent research and the comments received in response to the 2010 ANPRM, that because of the major movie theater companies' commitment to the transition to digital cinema, research and investment into ways to deliver closed captioning has shifted away from analog movies to digital cinema. As such, there is only one product currently available on the market for providing closed captions for analog movies: Rear Window® Captioning (Rear Window® or RWC). RWC, when combined with audio description provided by DVS-Theatrical®(DVS), is called MoPix® systems.[19]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn19>
Unlike open captions that are burned onto the film itself, Rear Window® captions (and audio description) are generated via a technology that is not physically attached to the film and does not require that a separate copy of the film be made. The Rear Window® and audio-description systems work through a movie theater's digital sound system using Datasat Digital Entertainment's media player with captioning subtitling system (formerly DTS Digital Cinema).[20]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn20> The Datasat(tm) player sends the captions to a light-emitting diode (LED) display in the rear of the movie theater. A clear adjustable panel mounted on or near an individual viewer's seat reflects the captions correctly and superimposes them on that panel so that it appears to a Rear Window®user that the captions are on or near the movie image. This technology enables a movie theater that has been equipped with a Rear Window®Captioning system to exhibit any movie that is produced with captions at any showing, without displaying captions to every moviegoer in the theater. Thus, individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing may enjoy movies in a movie theater equipped with such a system alongside those who do not require captioning and who would not see the captions being displayed. Movie theaters can also exhibit movies with open captions for analog movies by using the same Datasat(tm)system, with a second projector to superimpose the captioned text directly onto the movie screen.
Audio description makes movies more accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision by providing narrated information about key visual elements of the movie, such as actions, settings, and scene changes. The audio description is sent by the Datasat(tm) media player to infra-red or FM listening systems, then on to movie patrons wearing headsets.
According to comments from the WGBH National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM), as of mid-2010, MoPix® systems had been installed in more than 400 screens in the United States and Canada.[21]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn21> Once a movie theater is equipped with a MoPix® system, captioning and description data are supplied on data disks, which arrive in advance of the film's debut. According to NCAM, virtually every major Hollywood studio participates in captioning and description of their A-title feature analog movies in one form or another, and many of the major exhibition chains, as well as many smaller chains, provide captions and descriptions regularly in some of their theaters.
The Department understands that while the industry is rapidly moving to digital cinema, some theaters, particularly very small independent movie theaters, may continue to exhibit analog movies as long as such a product remains available. The Department also understands that with the transition to digital cinema, a secondary market for closed-captioning equipment for analog movies may develop because some movie theaters may choose not to retain this equipment, thereby making the analog equipment cheaper to acquire.
Question 1a: Availability of Analog Film Prints
The Department is interested in any recent data available about the likelihood that analog film prints will be available after 2015 either from the major studios, from smaller independent studios, or from small independent filmmakers. What is the likelihood that analog film prints will be available in five years? Will analog versions of older movies continue to be available for second or third run showings? How many movies will continue to be produced in both analog and digital formats?
Question 1b: Availability of Movies with Captions and Audio Description
What percentage of currently available analog films has been produced with captions or audio description? How many movies will be produced with captions and audio description in both analog and digital formats? What is the likelihood that existing analog movies that currently do not have captions or audio description will be converted to digital formats and then only the digital format would have those accessibility features? Will those older analog movies that are currently available with captions continue to be available with captions?
Question 1c: Economic Viability of Analog Theaters
How many analog theatres currently show first-run movies? If first-run analog movies are no longer produced, will analog theaters be economically viable and what types of movies would these theaters rely on to generate revenue? How many analog theaters are likely to close as the result of these changes in the market? Will this rule affect the pace by which analog theaters convert to digital cinema? If so, how? Will analog theatres converting to digital cinema convert all screens at the same time?
2. Captioning and Description for Digital Cinema
Since publication of the 2008 NPRM, a significant change has occurred in the industry, both in terms of the technology available for digital cinema and the speed at which movie theaters are converting to digital cinema. With the move to convert to digital cinema systems, the technology and equipment available for these systems has expanded accordingly. Digital cinema, which began to be developed in 2000, consists primarily of a digital server and a digital projector. The content of the digital movie can be distributed digitally, often using a hard drive, optical disks, or satellite.[22]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn22> See, e.g., Michael Karagosian, Accessibility in the Cinema (June 3, 2010), available at http://www.mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/presentations/2010-June_CHHA_Karagosian.pdf (last visited July 14, 2014). Unlike analog movies, digital cinema does not need splicing after delivery to the movie theater, thereby eliminating the risk of nicks to the film, and does not degrade over time or with repeated use. It also is "unlocked," which means there are no technology-based royalties to be paid for distributing the content. Id. According to comments from NCAM, captions and audio description are included in the digital cinema package (DCP). The DCP contains the entire movie in electronic form (images, soundtrack, anti-piracy data, and if provided by the studios, captioning and description). When ordering a DCP, movie theaters have the option to request either an open-captioned or a closed-captioned version of the movie. If an open-captioned version is requested, no other equipment (such as an interface or personal user devices) is necessary in order to display a movie with the captions exhibited.
As digital cinema technology has advanced, the options and methods available for exhibiting movies with captioning and audio description have also expanded. Members of the industry, manufacturers, and other interested parties worked together to ensure interoperability of digital cinema components through standards adopted by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), so that products that provide captioning and audio description would be compatible with the various digital cinema systems available for purchase and use by movie theaters.[23]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn23> For this and other reasons, in digital cinema systems it is much easier and far less costly to exhibit movies with captioning and audio description. For example, unlike analog movies, digital cinema has many sound channels, making it much easier to include audio description. See Michael Karagosian, Accessibility in the Cinema (June 3, 2010), available at http://www.mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/presentations/2010-June_CHHA_Karagosian.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014). In addition, digital cinema can easily support closed captions, including up to six closed-captioned languages at a time. Id. And for closed captions, a standardized output is available that permits the closed captioned product to plug in to any compliant digital system. Id.
In terms of equipment needed, it is easier to exhibit movies in digital cinema using open captions because all that is required is that the captions be turned on. No additional equipment (e.g., individual captioning devices) is needed to display open captioned movies. Open captions, like closed captions, are included in the DCP and the movie theater simply requests a DCP with either open or closed captions.
Based upon the Department's research, conversations with manufacturers, and comments received by the Department, several options appear to be available for delivering closed captions in digital films to the movie patron. For example, two manufacturers produce and sell wireless closed-captioned displays that are mounted on a device that the movie patron places in the seat's cup holder. See Michael Karagosian, Update on Digital Cinema Support for Those with Disabilities: April 2013, available at http://www.mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/misc/disabilities_update.php(last visited July 14, 2014). One system uses a single infra-red transmitter for delivery of both closed captions and audio description. Id. A second system uses Wi-Fi technology to transmit closed captions directly from the server to a cup holder display unit. This system does not appear at this time to support audio description. However, according to its manufacturer, audio description can be provided through a third-party vendor system. The Department understands that cup holder displays are already in use in theaters in Canada as well as some theaters in the United States. Eyeglasses that display the text in front of the wearer's eye while watching a movie are also on the market. As of September 2012, Regal Cinema theaters had captioning glasses in use in 200 theaters and announced that it plans to use them in all of its theaters by April 2013. Other companies are also reported to be developing eyeglasses that can display captions. In addition, the Department understands that MoPix's® Rear Window closed-captioned devices work in digital cinema as well as analog. Movie theaters that have installed a captioning system for their analog product can still use that product with digital cinema. MoPix®'s devices are supported by several digital cinema servers directly, although other servers may need to obtain a special interface.[24]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn24>
In specialty movie theaters, such as IMAX or other big-screen format presentations, closed-captioning systems for digital cinema also work well, and the captioned data can be fed to the LED panel by a computer that is running special software that synchronizes the caption files to the film.
It is unclear from the comments received by the Department the extent to which 3D movies are currently being provided by studios or distributors with open or closed captioning. Commenters representing both movie theaters and movie studios stated that MPAA member companies are hopeful that technological developments will soon allow closed captioning for 3D version releases. A commenter involved in the development of the Rear Window®captioning system for analog movies stated that it has been tested in feature-length 3D presentations with positive viewer response. The Department's research indicates that both the captioning eyeglasses as well as the cup holder displays can show captions for 3D movies if the movies are provided with captioning. By contrast, the Department understands that the same technology provides audio description for both 2D and 3D movies. One commenter representing the movie theater industry stated that whenever audio description is available for digital 3D movies, it should be treated the same as audio description for film and video displays in other settings.
As with analog movies, the audio description in digital cinema is delivered using a wireless headset or ear phones. Digital cinema audio supports up to 16 channels of audio[25]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn25> and the cinema audio formats have two channels reserved for both hearing impaired audio and audio description. See Michael Karagosian, Accessibility in the Cinema (June 3, 2010), available at http://www.mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/presentations/2010-June_CHHA_Karagosian.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014). Moreover, both the infra-red and FM-audio single-channel systems presently used for assisted listening can be replaced by multi-channel systems that support both assisted listening and audio description.
3. Conversion to Digital Cinema
Despite the economic downturn over the last few years, the movie theater industry is rapidly increasing the number of screens that have converted to digital cinema since publication of the 2008 NPRM. In May 2013, an industry representative testified to Congress that as of that date, 88 percent of indoor movie screens in the United States had converted to digital cinema. See Testimony of John Fithian, President and CEO of the National Association of Theater Owners, Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pension (May 14, 2013), available at http://natoonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Harkin-Hearing-Testimony-May-2013.pdf (last visited July 14, 2014).
Starting in the late 2000's, a number of major movie studios entered into agreements to help defray the cost of conversion by paying a consortium of movie theater chains a "virtual print fee" of $800 to $1000 per film, per screen until the digital equipment is paid off. See Dawn C. Chmielewski, Major Studios Agree to Back Switch to Digital Projection, Los Angeles Times (Oct. 2, 2008), available at http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/02/business/fi-studios2 (last visited July 14, 2014). The Department understands that nearly all of these programs have stopped enrolling new members, although the deals continue to be active for those who have already signed up. According to an industry commenter, these digital cinema systems are SMPTE-compliant, which means that all of the captioning and audio-description products on the market-and in development-will be compatible with, and easily integrated into, whatever digital cinema systems are in use by the various movie theaters. In addition, it has recently been reported that between the conversion to digital and the projected loss of the two major suppliers of film print stock, it is unlikely that any first run films will be available in analog within the next few years, thus furthering the pressure on smaller theaters to convert to digital. See e.g., Gendy Alimurung, Movie Studios Are Forcing Hollywood to Abandon 35mm Film. But the Consequences of Going Digital Are Vast, and Troubling, LA Weekly (Apr. 12, 2012), available at http://www.laweekly.com/2012-04-12/film-tv/35-mm-film-digital-Hollywood (last visited July 14, 2014); Dawn McCarty & Beth Jinks, Kodak Files for Bankruptcy as Digital Era Spells End to Film, Bloomberg (Jan. 19, 2012), available at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2012-01-19/kodak-photography-pioneer-files-for-bankruptcy-protection-1-.html(last visited July 14, 2014); see also Tim O'Reiley, Theater Official Optimistic Despite Attendance Slump, Las Vegas Review-Journal (March 29, 2011) (quoting new MPAA head, former Sen. Christopher Dodd, as predicting that "films on film will disappear in less than three years"), available at http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/theater-official-optimistic-despite-attendance-slump(last visited July 14, 2014).
4. Availability of Movies with Captioning and Audio Description
As stated previously, movie theaters do not provide the captioning and audio description for the movies they exhibit. Movie studios and distributors determine whether to caption and audio describe, what to caption and audio describe, the type of captioning to use, and the content of the captions and audio-description script. In addition, movie studios and distributors assume the costs of captioning and describing movies. Movie studios and distributors would not be required by this proposed regulation to include captioning or audio description in their product, because the mere production and distribution of movies does not make them public accommodations under the ADA. That said, movie studios appear committed to making their movies accessible to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision, and the Department commends their efforts. According to the MPAA, analog movies produced with captioning by member studios in 2010 included virtually all wide-releases.[26]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn26> Seventy-six percent of analog movies produced by MPAA member studios were produced with audio description. According to another industry commenter, MPAA member studios distributed 140 films in 2010, captioning 86 percent of their film product. The MPAA, in its comments to the 2010 ANPRM, stated that by the latter part of 2010, the major studios were making captioning and audio description available on some digital movies and had announced that in 2011 almost all theatrical releases in digital format will include closed captioning.[27]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn27> In addition, the MPAA stated in its comments that its members intend to significantly increase the number of digital releases with audio description in 2011. No data are publicly available on the number of movies released with captioning and audio description since 2011, but given the current trend, the Department projects that the numbers increased in 2012. One movie theater industry commenter pointed out that while MPAA member studios distributed 140 movies in 2010, the independent studios released 473 films, a majority of which were not captioned or audio described. The number of independent films released can be somewhat deceptive in this context, however, because MPAA member studios distribute 82 percent of the film product in the United States. The larger independent studios, which include Dreamworks, Lionsgate, Summit, The Weinstein Company, and MGM, distribute an additional 14 percent of the domestic product, and the other independent studios distribute the remaining 4 percent of the product domestically. It is unclear how many movies that are captioned and audio described are currently distributed by the independent studios.[28]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn28> It is also unclear whether, and what percentage of, movies will be made in digital format for digital cinema by these same independent studios in the future, and what percentage will be captioned and audio described. However, if independent producers distribute their product to television, albeit in analog or digital format, captions must be included under current FCC rules. See 47 CFR 79.1.
Despite the array of captioned and described product that is available, there are still a significant number of movie theaters that are not equipped to show movies with closed movie captions and audio description or that only show them at selected showings of particular movies. According to NATO, as of May 2013, at least 53 percent of digital movie screens had the capacity to show movies with closed movie captions or audio description. See Testimony of John Fithian, President and CEO of the National Association of Theater Owners, Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pension (May 14, 2013), available at http://natoonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Harkin-Hearing-Testimony-May-2013.pdf (last visited July 14, 2014). Three of the four largest movie theater chains have publicly committed to installing closed captioning and audio description equipment in all of their theaters that have been converted to digital. SeePress Release, Regal Entertainment Group, Regal Entertainment Group Announces New Forms of Digital Cinema Access (May 4, 2011), available at http://investor.regmovies.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=222211&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1559531&highlight(last visited July 14, 2014); Press Release, Cinemark Holdings, Inc., Cinemark and ALDA Announce Greater Movie Theatre Accessibility for Customers who are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (April 26, 2011), available at http://www.cinemark.com/pressreleasedetail.aspx?node_id=22850(last visited July 14, 2014); Press Release, Disability Rights Advocates, AMC Theatres and ALDA Announce Greater Accessibility for Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing Guests at All Digital Movie Theatres in California, (Dec. 20, 2011), available at http://www.dralegal.org/pressroom/press-releases/amc-theatres-and-ALDA-announce-greater-accessibility-for-deaf-or-hard-of(last visited July 14, 2014).
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 36.303(g) Movie Captioning and Audio Description-Definitions
Movie Theater. In order to make it clear which facilities are subject to the specific captioning and audio-description requirements set forth in § 36.303(g), the Department is proposing in § 36.303(g)(1)(v), to define the term "movie theater" as "a facility other than a drive-in theater that is used primarily for the purpose of showing movies to the public for a fee." Movie theaters include all movie theaters that exhibit movies for a fee, except drive-in movie theaters. The term includes movie theaters that exhibit second- and third-run movies as well first-run releases. The term is not a synonym for movie screen. A movie theater can have one or more screens available to show movies in several auditoriums. The term "movie theater" does not include facilities that screen movies, such as museums, hotels and resorts, or cruise ships, even if they charge an additional fee, if the facility is not used primarily for the purpose of showing movies for a fee.
Paragraph 36.303(g) is a specific application of the auxiliary aid and service requirement for movie theaters. Such a provision is necessary because of the technological advances in auxiliary aids and services that enable movie theaters to screen movies in a manner that provides effective communication to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. The Department's title III regulation makes clear that public accommodations that exhibit movies but are not movie theaters, such as museums and amusement parks, must provide effective communication to the public through the provision of auxiliary aids and services, including, where appropriate, captioning and audio description. See generally 28 CFR 36.303; 28 CFR part 36, app. B. Many such public accommodations have been providing appropriate auxiliary aids, either through open captions, closed captions, or a mix of the two, and audio description. Even in situations in which the Department identified a need for enforcement action, these public accommodations were willing to comply with the ADA and provide such auxiliary aids and services. See, e.g.,Press Release, U.S. Department of Justice, Settlement Agreement Will Ensure Accessibility at the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C. (June 3, 2006), available at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2008/June/08-crt-489.html (last visited July 14, 2014); Press Release, U.S. Department of Justice, Walt Disney World Co. Agrees to Provide Services to Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Guests (Jan. 17, 1997), available at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/1997/January97/021cr.htm(last visited July 14, 2014).
Commenters on the 2010 ANPRM advised the Department that the technology does not yet exist to exhibit movies with closed captions or audio description at drive-in movie theaters that have an outdoor patron field that is typically spread across more than eight acres. In addition, these comments indicated that given that there are fewer than 400 drive-in theaters in the United States, it is unlikely that such technology will be developed in the near future. Thus, the Department is proposing to exclude drive-in movie theaters from the definition of movie theater in this rule and defer rulemaking regarding drive-in theaters until such time that the necessary technology for closed captions and audio description for drive-in theaters becomes commercially available.
Question 2: Does the definition of "movie theater" adequately describe the movie theaters that should be covered by this regulation? Are there any non-profit movie theaters that would be covered by this definition? How many non-profit movie theaters are there? Should drive-in movie theaters be excluded from the definition of movie theaters at this time? Is there technology under development that might make it possible for drive-in movie theaters to provide closed captions or audio description in the future?
Audio description. For the purposes of this subsection, the Department is proposing to add a definition for "audio description." In proposed § 36.303(g)(1)(i), "audio description" is defined as the "provision of a spoken narration of key visual elements of a visually delivered medium, including, but not limited to, actions, settings, facial expressions, costumes, and scene changes."
In the Department's July 26, 2010, ANPRM, the Department used the term "video description" to define the process and experience whereby individuals who are blind or have low vision are provided with a spoken narrative of key visual elements of a movie, such as actions, settings, facial expressions, costumes, and scene changes. The Department received several comments addressing whether it should continue to use the term "video description" or other terms, including "audio description." The majority of commenters addressing this issue supported the use of the term "audio description," stating that audio description has been used since 1981 as the term of art to describe using language to provide access to visual images, and pointing out that the National Endowment for the Arts and the Graphic Artists Guild both use the logo "AD" to indicate the availability of audio description. In addition, audio description more appropriately describes the type of auxiliary aid involved, because the process involves providing information that is experienced aurally. In response to these comments, the Department has been persuaded to change the nomenclature for this process to "audio description."
Question 3: Should "audio description" be the nomenclature adopted in the final rule?
Closed movie captioning. The Department notes that the term "closed captioning" is referenced in the examples of auxiliary aids and services in § 36.303(b). That section refers to "closed captioning" in the much broader context of auxiliary aids and services that must be provided by a wide range of public accommodations subject to title III. In order to distinguish between the general auxiliary aid and service requirement and the"closed captioning" that is required by § 36.303(g)(2), the Department is proposing to define the term "closed movie captioning" specifically as it applies to movie theaters. In § 36.303(g)(1)(ii), the Department proposes to define "closed movie captioning" as "the written text of the movie dialogue and other sounds or sound making (e.g., sound effects, music, and the character who is speaking). Closed movie captioning is available only to individuals who request it. Generally, it requires the use of an individual captioning device to deliver the captions to the patron."
The Department received one comment encouraging it to use the term "individual captioning" instead of "closed captioning" to refer to the circumstances where captions are received through the use of individual devices. This commenter distinguished between three types of captioning: open captioning, where the captions are displayed on the screen and cannot be turned off; closed captioning as the term is used in the context of television and video where the captions can be turned on or off, but when they are displayed everyone in the room sees them; and individual captioning systems, where only the individual viewer sees the captions, but they are not displayed to the entire audience. As stated earlier, the Department wishes to avoid confusion between the "closed captioning" provided on television and in other venues, and those provided in movie theaters. However, it believes its proposed term "closed movie captioning" will address that concern without introducing a term that is wholly different from that currently used by the movie industry and the courts.
Question 4: Should the Department use the term "closed movie captioning" to refer to the type of captioning provided by movie theaters to individuals who view the captions at their seats? Is there a different term that should be used in order to distinguish between the closed captioning referred to in § 36.303(b) and the captioning required for movie theaters in proposed § 36.303(g)(2)?
Individual audio description listening device. In § 36.303(g)(1)(iii), the Department is proposing to define "individual audio description listening device"as the individual device that patrons may use at their seats to hear audio description.
Individual captioning device. In § 36.303(g)(1)(iv), the Department is proposing to define "individual captioning device" as "the individual device that patrons may use at their seats to view the closed captions."
Open movie captioning. The Department notes that the term "open captioning" is already referenced in the examples of auxiliary aids and services provided in § 36.303(b). That section refers to "open movie captioning"in the much broader context of auxiliary aids and services that must be provided by the wide range of public accommodations subject to title III. In order to distinguish between the general auxiliary aid requirement and the"open captioning" that is referenced in § 36.303(g)(2)(ii), the Department is proposing to define the term "open movie captioning" specifically as it applies to movie theaters. In § 36.303(g)(1)(vi), the Department proposes to define"open movie captioning" as "the provision of the written text of the movie dialogue and other sounds or sound making in an on-screen text format that is seen by everyone in the theater."
Question 5: Should the Department use the term "open movie captioning" to refer to the type of captioning that is viewed on or near the movie screen by everyone in the movie theater audience? Is there a different term that should be used?
Movie Captioning Coverage
The Department asked nine questions in its 2010 ANPRM on the scope of coverage and how best to frame any regulation requiring exhibiting movies with closed captions and audio description. In that ANPRM, the Department stated it was considering proposing a regulation that would require that 50 percent of movie screens exhibit movies with captioning and audio description and that any such requirement would be phased in over a five-year period. However, after review and analysis of the statutory structure of the ADA, its regulatory requirements and legislative history, and the technological advances since enactment of the ADA, the Department is convinced that any regulation regarding captioning and audio description should be written broadly, like the ADA itself.
In the NPRM, § 36.303(g)(2)(i), the Department proposes to require that "[a] public accommodation that owns, leases, leases to, or operates a movie theater shall ensure that its auditoriums have the capability to exhibit movies with closed movie captions. In all cases where the movies it intends to exhibit are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with closed movie captions, the public accommodation shall ensure that it acquires the captioned version of that movie. Movie theaters must then exhibit such movies with closed movie captions available at all scheduled screenings of those movies." As discussed below, the Department is proposing to apply this requirement to all digital movie screens in movie theaters and is seeking public comment as to the best approach (i.e., delayed compliance date or deferral) to take with respect to analog movie screens.[29]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn29>
The Department is proposing that all movies available with captioning be exhibited with captioning at all times unless doing so would be an undue burden.[30]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn30> The primary goals of the ADA are to assure equality of opportunity and full access and participation in our society for individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C. 12101. To that end, and as stated previously, the ADA prohibits public accommodations such as movie theaters from affording individuals with disabilities an unequal or lesser service than that offered to other individuals. 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(1)(A)(ii). The ADA requires public accommodations "to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated, or otherwise treated differently * * * because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services," unless the public accommodation can demonstrate that taking such steps would result in a fundamental alteration or undue burden. 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii).
The ADA envisions that effective communication through the provision of appropriate auxiliary aids and services be provided for all of a public accommodation's services and that individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind, or have low vision have access to all of a public accommodation's services, absent a legitimate defense. As such, it is not enough to offer captioned movies (or movies with audio description) for limited movies at limited times, absent a legitimate defense. Rather, such individuals should be able, along with the rest of the population, to attend a movie at any date and time. Based on the information it currently has, the Department does not believe it would be appropriate to propose an across-the-board phase-in of this requirement over five years. Information available to the Department since the publication of the ANPRM makes it clear that the pace of conversion to digital cinema has accelerated rapidly and there are a number of different options available for providing closed movie captions and audio description. Therefore, at this time, the Department does not believe that it is necessary to delay the implementation of the final rule for digital movie screens.
The Department's proposed provision would impose a three-fold requirement upon movie theaters. First, as of the compliance date of this rule, movie theaters must have the capacity to exhibit movies with captions. Second, if a movie is available with captions because it has been produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with captioning, then movie theaters are required to obtain that particular movie in a version with captions, and not in a version without captions. Third, those movie theaters are required to display that movie with the captions to patrons upon request.
The first proposed requirement mandates that movie theaters acquire whatever equipment they need to have the capability to exhibit movies with closed captions. The second proposed requirement mandates that movie theaters select the captioned version of a movie if captions are available for that particular movie. It does not limit the selection or mix of movies that a movie theater may choose. In other words, if a particular movie is not available with captioning (because it has not been produced, distributed, or otherwise made available to the movie theater with captions), then the movie theater is in no way limited or prohibited from acquiring or exhibiting that particular movie. In addition, if a movie is available in both analog and digital formats, but only available with captions in the digital format, then a theater with both digital and analog screens is not required to obtain the captioned digital version if it had intended to show that particular movie on its analog screens. In addition, this proposed rule does not require theaters to add captions to movies that are only available from studios/distributors without captions. Finally, the third proposed requirement only relates to the exhibition of movies obtained with captioning available. The Department understands that decisions about which movies to release with captions or audio description and whether open or closed captions or audio description are provided for a particular movie are decisions made by movie studios and distributors, not movie theaters. The Department notes that obtaining a captioned version of a movie does not require a theater to search for accessible versions of movies because it is the Department's understanding that each movie (either with or without captions) is only available through a single distributor. We have no information that suggests that, in the future, particular movies will be available through multiple distributors and that some distributors may have versions with closed captioning and audio description features and others may not.
Even if that particular movie may be the only movie that a movie theater chooses to exhibit at that time throughout all its auditoriums, there is no obligation under this proposed regulation to exhibit the movie with captioning or audio description if it is not made available with these features. If a movie is available with captioning but not with audio description, than the movie must be exhibited with the captions whenever a request for the captions is made, but the requirement for audio description would not apply to the showing of that movie. This proposed rule would ensure that movie theaters have the capability to exhibit movies that are produced or distributed with captioning and audio description available and that they exhibit such movies with captioning and audio description whenever a request is made for these auxiliary aids.
Comments from NATO on the ANPRM suggested that if the Department issues a regulation requiring captioning then it should not phase-in compliance over five years, but instead should give large, digital theaters five years until they have to comply. NATO also recommended that the Department reduce the required number of screens that need to be accessible to 25 percent and only apply that requirement to movie theaters undergoing digital conversion. NATO also objected to a captioning and audio-description requirement for movie theaters that do not convert to digital, citing uncertainty as to whether many first-run analog movies will be produced in the future, or whether any of them will be distributed with captions and audio description.
As stated earlier, the Department does not believe it appropriate to propose that captioning or audio description be available in less than 100 percent of the movie theaters that exhibit movies that are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with captioning or audio description. Moreover, there are two reasons that Department does not believe a phased-in compliance schedule is appropriate. First, as discussed in the section on the legal basis for the rule, and as recognized by the Ninth Circuit in the Harkins case, movie theaters already have an obligation to provide effective communication to persons with disabilities 100 percent of the time. Second, as the industry acknowledged in its comments on the 2010 ANPRM, a rolling compliance period is difficult to implement given the way the market works-i.e., it is not easy to purchase and install equipment on a set rolling schedule. In addition, as discussed earlier, the Department understands that at least 53 percent of movie screens already have the necessary equipment to show captions and provide audio description and three of the four largest movie theater companies have already committed to make captioning and audio description available at 100 percent of their theaters, as have several smaller movie theater companies.
The Department is proposing that the rule take effect for movie screens that have already converted to digital six months from the publication date of the final rule in the Federal Register. The Department believes six months is sufficient time for theaters that have already converted to digital to order and install the necessary equipment to provide captions and audio description, train employees on how to use the equipment and assist patrons in using it and develop and implement processes to ensure that all communications and advertisements intended to inform potential patrons of movie showings provide information regarding the availability of captioning and audio description for each movie.
The rule does not propose a compliance date for analog movie screens. As discussed below, because of the uncertainty about the future of analog theaters, and the future availability of analog film, the Department is seeking public comment on whether it should adopt a four-year delayed compliance date for analog movie screens, or whether it should defer coverage of analog screens and consider additional rulemaking at a later date.
The six-month compliance date applies to digital screens in all movie theaters, including a theater that has both analog and digital screens. For example, if a movie theater has 20 screens and 18 of them are digital and two are analog, the 18 digital screens are all subject to the six-month compliance date. In addition, the NPRM proposes that if an analog screen is converted to digital after the rule's six-month compliance date for digital screens, the newly converted digital screen will then be subject to the rule's requirements within six months from the date the screen is converted to digital.
In addition, from the law's inception in 1990, the statutory language of the ADA has provided flexibility based on cost in specific circumstances. All movie theaters, regardless of size, status of conversion to digital cinema, or economic viability, have available to them the same defense as do all other public accommodations-the individualized and fact-specific undue burden defense. The undue burden defense tailors the analysis to factor in the needs and resources of small businesses and the economic viability of those businesses. Throughout the last two decades movie theaters have been able to assert this defense when facing litigation alleging a failure to provide effective communication to patrons with disabilities. This regulation does not change the availability of this defense or the circumstances under which it can be asserted. It does, however, provide clarity about how movie theaters can meet their longstanding effective communication obligations under the ADA.
The Department notes that even if a movie theater cannot install the equipment in all of its auditoriums due to an undue financial burden, the movie theater is still obligated to take steps to maximize the movie choices for customers who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. Maximizing the movie choices means that movie theaters should, to the extent possible based on the movie theaters' resources, be able to exhibit as many movies as possible with captioning and audio description in their auditoriums, throughout the day and evening, and on both weekdays and weekends. If, for example, a six-screen movie theater can only afford to install captioning equipment in half of its auditoriums, and it has auditoriums with different capacity, it should install captioning equipment in large, medium, and small auditoriums. This distribution of equipment would permit exhibition of different types of movies, as blockbusters generally are shown in larger auditoriums first and smaller budget movies or older movies may be shown only in medium or small auditoriums.[31]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn31>
Question 6: Consistent with President Obama's Memorandum issued on January 18, 2011, on regulatory flexibility, small business, and job creation, the Department invites comment on ways to tailor this regulation to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on small businesses.[32]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn32> For example: Should the Department have a different compliance schedule or different requirements for digital or analogtheatersthat have annual receipts below a certain threshold?If so, what should the schedule, requirements, or financial threshold be? Or, should the final rule have a different compliance schedule or requirements for single-screen or miniplex analog or digital theaters? Will all mega and multiplex theaters have converted to digital by the time the final rule goes into effect? Is a four-year compliance date reasonable for those screens that will remain analog? Please provide information to support your answer. Should the Department adopt a different compliance schedule or different requirements for nonprofit movie theaters? The Department invites comment on these alternatives and any other ways in which the final rule could be tailored to appropriately minimize costs on small theaters.
Question 7: Is the proposed six-month compliance date for digital screens a reasonable timeframe to comply with the rule? Is six months enough time to order, install, and gain familiarity using the necessary equipment; train staff so that they can meaningfully assist patrons; and meet the notice requirement of the proposed rule? Will manufacturers have the capacity to provide the necessary equipment for captioning and audio description as of the six-month proposed compliance date of this rule for digital movie screens? If the proposed six-month date is not reasonable, what should the compliance date be and why? Please provide specific examples, data, or explanation in support of your responses.
Analog Movie Screens
Based on information currently available, it appears likely that few, if any, analog movies will continue to be made by the major movie studios and possibly by the independent studios as well. Seeprevious discussion. It is unclear to the Department, however, whether those analog movies that continue to be made will be produced with captions and audio description. Thus, it could be that even if analog theaters were to have the capability of showing movies with captions and audio description, there may not be any movies for them to show with those accessibility features. It is also unclear how many, if any, analog theaters will continue to be viable within the next few years. The Department has asked for public comment on the future of analog theaters, analog movie production in general, and analog movies with accessible features. Based on the information available to the Department at the time it drafts the final rule, the Department will decide whether it is appropriate to just delay compliance for analog screens in movie theater auditoriums in order to allow sufficient time to comply with the specific requirements of the rule or defer applying these specific requirements altogether until such time that the Department, in light of available information, deems it appropriate to engage in further rulemaking on this subject. The Department is interested in public comment on whether there is a reasonable basis for deferring the application of this rule to movie theater auditoriums with analog screens or whether it should include an extended compliance date.
Question 8: Should the Department adopt a four-year compliance date for analog movie screens (Option 1) or should it defer application of the rule's requirements to analog screens for now and consider additional rulemaking with respect to analog screens at a later date (Option 2)? Commenters are encouraged to provide information to support their recommendation.
Open Captioning (or Other Technologies) as an Option for Compliance
In Question 9 of the 2010 ANPRM, the Department asked whether it should give movie theaters the discretion to exhibit movies with open captions should they so desire, as an alternate method of achieving compliance with a captioning regulation. Many of the commenters who addressed this issue, including those from the industry, supported this option.[33]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn33> The Department decided to include this option in the proposed regulation as an example of an alternative means of meeting the movie theaters' obligation to provide effective communication to patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing but in keeping with the ADA's legislative history, we are making it clear that the ADA does not require movie theaters to use open captions as a means of providing effective communication.[34]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn34> In the NPRM, § 36.303(g)(2)(ii) states that "[m]ovie theaters may meet their obligation to provide captions to persons with disabilities through use of a different technology, such as open movie captioning, so long as the communication provided is as effective as that provided to movie patrons without disabilities. Open movie captioning at some or all showings of a movie is never required as a means of compliance with this section, even if it is an undue burden for a theater to exhibit movies with closed movie captioning in an auditorium."[35]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn35>
The Department is aware, both from comments received from the industry and from some individuals, that open captions may reduce the amount of enjoyment experienced by people who do not need captioning. For those movie theaters that elect to meet these requirements through the exhibition of movies with open captioning, in whole or in part, the movie theaters may elect to turn on the open captions only after a timely request has been made for captions. For this approach to be effective, movie theaters should clearly and conspicuously advertise at the ticket offices and at the doors to each auditorium the process, procedures, and time periods for making captioning requests.
Question 9: Do the alternative provisions regarding when and how to employ open movie captions strike an appropriate balance? Should the Department define what a timely request is in this context? Has the Department adequately addressed the possibility that new technology may develop that can be used to provide effective communication at movie theaters?
Individual Captioning Devices
A commenter from a disability advocacy organization encouraged the Department to specify the number of individual captioning devices that must be made available at each movie theater, pointing out that groups of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing should be able to attend movies at the same time and have sufficient individual captioning devices available to enable them to enjoy the movie at the time of their choice. A commenter from the movie theater industry recommended that the Department require only one individual captioning device per movie screen equipped to display digital cinema. The Department already has a requirement for a specific number of assistive listening receivers that must be made available at each movie theater for persons who need amplification of sound during a movie. See table 219.3 in the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (2010 Standards).[36]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn36> Adding a requirement for a particular number of individual captioning devices would be consistent with that approach and is necessary to ensure that patrons who are deaf and hard of hearing are provided with effective communication.
In the NPRM, the Department is proposing scoping for the required number of individual captioning devices in numbers that approximate about half the number of assistive listening receivers already required for assembly areas by the 2010 Standards. Proposed § 36.303(g)(2)(iii)(A) states, "[a] public accommodation that owns, leases, or leases to, or operates a movie theater shall provide individual captioning devices in accordance with the following Table. This requirement does not apply to movie theaters that elect to exhibit all movies at all times at that facility with open movie captioning."
Capacity of Seating in Movie Theater

Minimum Required Number of Individual Captioning Devices

100 or less

2

101 to 200

2 plus 1 per 50 seats over 100 seats or a fraction thereof

201 to 500

4 plus 1 per 50 seats over 200 seats or a fraction thereof

501 to 1000

10 plus 1 per 75 seats over 500 seats or a fraction thereof

1001 to 2000

18 plus 1 per 100 seats over 1000 seats or a fraction thereof

2001 and over

28 plus 1 per 200 seats over 2000 seats or a fraction thereof

This table's proposed requirements are based on the total number of seats for all screens in the movie theater. If a movie theater has more than one screen, the number of seats are combined together to determine the required number of individual captioning devices.
The Department believes that its proposed numbers are sufficient because not every individual with hearing loss requires the use of captioning in order to enjoy movies. There are many individuals with mild to moderate hearing loss who can use the amplification provided by assistive listening receivers, although there are some individuals with moderate hearing loss for whom the assistive listening receivers are not effective. See discussion supra. The Department does not agree with the movie theater industry's recommendation that it should require each movie theater to have only one individual captioning device available for each auditorium that has captioning equipment installed because it does not believe that this would be a sufficient number given the number of persons with moderate and severe hearing loss or who are profoundly deaf who would benefit from closed captioning. Moreover, the Department believes that it is more appropriate to base the scoping for individual captioning devices on the number of seats at the movie theater, rather than the number of movie screens, because the number of devices should be proportionate to the number of individuals who can attend the movie. Under the Department's formula, a movie theater that had five screens in auditoriums that could accommodate a total of 3000 people would need to have more devices available than a movie theater that also had five screens but in auditoriums that could only accommodate a total of 1000 people. This approach is consistent with the way assistive listening receivers are scoped in the current regulation.
Industry commenters asserted that even in those auditoriums that have installed Rear Window®Captioning systems, industry data indicates that there are few requests to use them. Based on the comments received in response to its 2010 ANPRM and its independent research, the Department has concluded that the availability of captioning in the United States is limited, and it is therefore not appropriate to base conclusions about potential use of individual captioning devices on current usage data at those few auditoriums that offer closed captioning on a limited basis.[37]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn37> The Department believes that the demand for individual captioning devices will be much greater than one device per auditorium once movies are regularly and uniformly exhibited with captioning and the availability of captioning becomes widely known. This is especially true given the anticipated increase in the number of deaf and hard of hearing individuals in the United States that will come with the aging of the U.S. population.
The Department received numerous comments from advocacy organizations and deaf and hard of hearing individuals indicating that they were unable to attend the few movies currently offered with closed captioning because they were not publicized, were usually scheduled a few times a week at off hours (often in the middle of the weekday), or were only scheduled for one movie at a time, despite the variety of movies that are shown at any one time at a movie theater. These commenters stated that if captioned movies were available to them for all movies at all times, they would then become regular moviegoers in the same manner as persons who are not deaf or hard of hearing. These commenters included deaf and hard of hearing parents of children who wished to attend movies, teenagers who wished to attend movies with their friends on the weekends at peak times, and people who work during the day who wished to attend movies during evening hours and on weekends. Many of the deaf and hard of hearing individuals who testified at the Department's three public hearings or who submitted comments stressed that they have not been to a movie for many years either because of the lack of availability of captioning or because when they tried to see films advertised as having captioning they arrived at the movie theater only to find that the staff did not know where the individual captioning devices were or how to turn on the captioning, or the individual devices themselves malfunctioned.
Question 10: The Department seeks public comment on its proposed scoping for individual captioning devices. If the scoping is not correct, what are the minimum number of individual captioning devices that should be available at a movie theater? Please provide the basis for alternative suggestions. If the required number of individual captioning devices is linked to the number of seats in the movie theater facility, should the percentage decrease for very large facilities with multiple screens? What should the threshold(s) be for this calculation? Should the Department consider different scoping approaches for small theaters? How so and why? Are there alternative scoping approaches that the Department should consider to address variability in demand for the devices across theaters? If so, please describe such alternatives in as much detail as possible.
Standards for Individual Captioning Devices
The Department received a number of comments for specific performance standards for individual captioning devices. These commenters wanted the Department to ensure that the text that is exhibited on these devices is readable with good contrast and good text size, that it be available at a reasonable height in relation to the movie screen, that the devices be easily used by patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing, and that they be properly maintained. The Department has considered these comments and is proposing in the NPRM, at §36.303(g)(2)(ii)(B), that "[i]n order to provide effective communication, individual captioning devices must: (1) be adjustable so that the captions can be viewed as if they are on or near the movie screen; (2) be available to patrons in a timely manner; (3) provide clear, sharp images in order to ensure readability; and (4) be properly maintained and be easily usable by the patron."
The Department received a number of comments expressing concern that seat location can have an impact on the ability to read closed captions. Those commenters recommended that the Department require movie theaters to reserve seats in the center of the auditorium to persons using individual captioning devices. In contrast, an industry commenter stated that the ability to read the captions provided by the new closed-caption systems for digital cinema has been reported to be equally good throughout the movie theater auditorium and that the system currently in use for analog has reportedly been improved for use with digital cinema.
The Department has decided not to propose any kind of reserved seating provision in the regulation at this point because it believes that its proposed performance standards will ensure the usability of individual captioning devices. In addition, seating at movie theaters generally is on a first-come, first-served basis, and patrons know to come early if they want to sit in the "sweet spot" or other desirable seats in the auditorium.[38]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn38> While movie theaters may select whatever captioning equipment they want to deliver closed captions to their patrons, they must provide effective communication to individuals with disabilities who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind, or have low vision. The proposed performance standards should assist movie theaters in meeting that requirement.
Question 11: Has the Department adequately described performance standards for individual captioning devices that deliver closed captions to patrons? How should the standards address text size that is displayed on the devices?
Audio Description
Coverage. In § 36.303(g)(3)(ii) of the NPRM, the Department is proposing that a public accommodation that owns, leases, leases to, or operates a movie theater shall ensure that its auditoriums have the capability to exhibit movies with audio description and in all cases where the movies it intends to exhibit are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with audio description, the public accommodation shall ensure that it exhibits such movies with audio description at all scheduled screenings of those movies. This requirement is comparable to the requirement for exhibition of movies with closed captioning at proposed § 36.303(g)(2). In addition, with respect to digital screens, the Department is proposing the same six-month compliance date for the provision of audio description at § 36.303(g)(3)(i) as it is for movie captioning. With respect to analog screens, the Department is seeking public comment on whether to adopt a four-year delayed compliance date for the provision of audio description or defer new requirements for analog screens to provide audio description for now and consider additional rulemaking at a later date.
The Department received virtually no comments objecting to a requirement for the exhibition of movies with audio description when such movies are available to movie theaters with audio description. The overwhelming number of commenters addressing audio description indicated that they believed it should be available at all movies at all times. However, while industry commenters agreed that audio description should be available, they suggested limiting any requirement for exhibiting movies with audio description to 25 percent of those auditoriums that have converted to digital cinema. A 25 percent requirement would significantly limit the availability of movies with audio description across the country.
As discussed with respect to proposed § 36.303(g)(2) (movie captioning), the Department believes that given the availability of audio-description technology, and in light of the purpose and goals of the ADA and its statutory and regulatory framework, the ADA requires nothing less than full access to audio-described movies at all times such movies are exhibited, whenever such movies are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available to movie theaters. The primary goals of the ADA are to assure equality of opportunity and full access and participation in our society for individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C. 12101. The ADA requires public accommodations to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated, or otherwise treated differently because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services unless the public accommodation can demonstrate that taking such steps would result in a fundamental alteration or undue burden. 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii).
Individual audio-description listening devices. In order to ensure that individuals who are blind or have low vision have access to audio-described movies when such movies are available in a movie theater, the theater needs to provide a reasonable number of audio-description listening devices for individual use. The comments received and the Department's research indicate that many of the assistive listening receivers currently in use in the United States have two channels, one of which is needed for amplified sound, and the other that could be used for audio description. The NPRM proposes at § 36.303(g)(3)(ii)(B) that a theater may meet its obligation to provide individual captioning devices if the receivers it uses to meet its obligations to provide assistive listening systems in accordance with the requirements in table 219.3 of the 2010 Standards have at least two channels, one of which can be available for transmission of audio description. For those theaters that do not have two-channel assistive listening receivers, the Department is proposing in § 36.303(g)(3)(ii)(A) to require minimal scoping of one individual audio-description listening device per auditorium, with a minimum of two devices per theater. This proposal is relatively consistent with the recommendations of at least one industry commenter on the 2010 ANPRM, who asserted that the Department should limit any requirement for individual audio-description listening devices to one receiver per auditorium. In any event, the Department believes that because many movie theaters already have two channel assistive listening receivers that they use to meet their existing requirements under the 2010 Standards, the proposed scoping will not require many movie theaters to buy additional equipment.
The Department received comments and heard testimony from individuals and organizations representing individuals who are blind and have low vision stating that they do not attend movies because of the lack of audio description, but would begin going to movies once audio description is readily available.
Question 12: How many devices capable of transmitting audio description to individuals should each movie theater have on hand for use by patrons who are blind or have low vision? Should the number of individual audio-description listening devices be tied to the number of seats in each auditorium or other location with a movie screen? Should the number of individual audio-description listening devices be tied to the number of seats in the theater facility as a whole? Please provide the basis for your comment. How many movie theaters have two-channel receivers that can be used to provide audio description? How many movie theaters will need to buy additional individual audio description listening devices? How much do audio description listening devices that meet the requirements of this proposed rule cost?
For some small movie theaters, it may be an undue burden to purchase the equipment needed to exhibit movies with closed captioning and audio description and meet the other requirements of the rule. Determining whether compliance with the requirements of this rule will result in an undue burden, however, requires the individualized, fact-specific inquiry and analysis discussed previously. In some circumstances, movie theaters may incur a cost to determine whether and to what extent compliance with the rule would result in an undue burden. Such costs may include the time to determine how to comply with the rule's requirements; the time to gather, compile, and review financial records; and the time to obtain estimates of the cost of compliance. The Department lacks information necessary for estimating the time and other costs a theater would incur to determine whether compliance would result in an undue burden and the extent to which this rule would increase movie theaters'legitimate use of the undue burden analysis compared to the status quo. This information, however, would be important for analyzing at the final rule stage the incremental effect of the rule and for analyzing regulatory alternatives, particularly for small theaters.
The Department notes that many small businesses will be able to defray the costs of compliance with this rule if they qualify for a special IRS tax credit that is intended to defray the costs of providing access to persons with disabilities in accordance with the requirements of the ADA. Section 44 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 allows eligible businesses a tax credit of 50 percent of the cost of "eligible access expenditures," defined as amounts paid or incurred "(A) for the purpose of removing architectural, communication, physical, or transportation barriers which prevent a business from being accessible to, or usable by, individuals with disabilities, * * * (D) to acquire or modify equipment or devices for individuals with disabilities, or (E) to provide other similar services, modifications, materials, or equipment." 26 U.S.C. 44(c)(2). This tax credit is available to businesses with gross receipts of less than one million dollars each year or that have 30 or fewer full-time employees. See 26 U.S.C. 44(b). The Department believes that providing captioning and audio description to meet the longstanding obligation to provide effective communication under the ADA falls within this tax code provision.
Question 13: The Department invites comments on the additional time it will take and other possible costs movie theaters would incur to determine whether compliance with the rule would constitute an undue burden. What kinds of costs are involved? How much time would a theater spend determining how to comply with the rule; gathering, compiling, and reviewing financial records; and estimating the cost of compliance? Would small theaters have professionals such as accountants or lawyers review their financial records? What information should the Department use to estimate the per hour cost of the time movie theaters spend undertaking these activities? How might the Department develop an estimate of the average time and cost required to determine whether full compliance would constitute an undue burden? To what extent would this rule increase movie theaters' reliance on the undue burden analysis compared to the status quo? What characteristics of small theaters would make it more likely that it would be an undue burden to comply with the rule? Are there empirical studies or other credible information available for estimating the time and cost for a theater to make a legitimate determination that compliance would constitute an undue burden? The Department is interested in comments in response to these questions from the public in general, but particularly from small movie theater owners and operators and from other small businesses covered by title III of the ADA with experience in determining whether it is an undue burden to meet their effective communication obligation.
Notice Requirement
The Department believes that it is essential that movie theaters provide adequate notice to patrons of the availability of captioned and audio-described movies. In the 2010 ANPRM, in Question 18, the Department requested public comment relating to the necessity of a requirement for providing notice about the availability of captioned and audio-described movies and the scope of such a requirement. The Department received numerous comments in response to this question. The vast majority of commenters supported a notice requirement that included provisions for notice in the range of communications and media utilized by movie theaters to advertise their films. Several commenters recommended that the Department require a uniform system of labeling movies as having open captioning (OC), closed captioning (CC), or audio description (AD). Other commenters stated that they believed the form of notice should be left to the discretion of movie theaters. Many commenters encouraged the Department to ensure that movie listings provided over the phone include this information, so that patrons who are blind and have low vision and who do not utilize Web-based or print media can find out which movies carry audio description. Industry commenters noted that while the industry agrees that providing notice of captioning and audio description is important, movie theaters do not have control over the information provided on third-party Web sites that provide show time information and that sell tickets. These same commenters indicated that they have been working with these Web sites to voluntarily provide accurate information about current screenings of captioned and audio-described movies. Many commenters noted that if the Department adopted a requirement that all movies be shown with captioning and audio description, the need for notice would disappear, since patrons could assume that all movies would be accessible to them.
After considering these comments, the Department has decided to propose a requirement for provision of notice to patrons that covers all types of communications and advertisements provided by movie theaters, but does not require a specific form of notification. Proposed §36.303(g)(5) states the following: "movie theaters shall ensure that communications and advertisements intended to inform potential patrons of movie showings and times, that are provided by the theaters through websites, posters, marquees, newspapers, telephone, and other forms of communication, shall provide information regarding the availability of captioning and audio description for each movie." Even though the Department has proposed a 100 percent requirement, it will still be necessary to provide notice regarding which movies have captions and audio description because not all movies will be available to movie theaters with captions or audio description. The Department notes that third parties are not liable under the ADA when they publish information about movies if they fail to include information about the availability of captioning and audio description at movie theaters.
Question 14: It is the Department's view that the cost of the proposed requirement for theaters to provide notice indicating which screenings will be captioned or audio-described is de minimus. The Department requests comments on this view. Specifically, how much will it cost theaters to provide information regarding the availability of captioning and audio description for each movie and to specify whether open movie captions or closed movie captions will be provided for each particular showing and time? The Department understands that this cost may vary depending on the type of communication or advertisement, and so we request that commenters specify the type of communication or advertisement along with their cost estimate. In addition, how many times in a given year do theaters provide communications and advertisements that would trigger this proposed requirement? The Department understands that this will likely vary depending on how many screens a theater has, and so we request theater commenters to specify how many screens they operate in their response to this question. Because the rule would require 100 percent of movies available with captions and audio description to be shown with these accessibility features, should the Department permit theaters to indicate those movies that do not have these features rather than indicating those that have these features? Would this approach have an effect on the cost of providing notice? If so, how would it affect the cost?
Capability to Operate Captioning and Audio Description Equipment
The Department received a significant number of comments from individuals with disabilities and groups representing persons who are deaf or hard of hearing and who are blind or have low vision strongly encouraging the Department to include a requirement that staff at movie theaters know how to operate captioning and audio description equipment and be able to communicate about the use of individual devices with patrons. These commenters stated that on numerous occasions when they attempted to go to a movie advertised as having captioning or audio description, there was no staff available who knew where the individual captioning devices were kept or how to turn on the captioning or audio description for the movie. Many of these individuals indicated they were unable to experience the movie fully because of the lack of trained personnel, even if the auditorium was properly equipped and the movie was actually available with captioning or audio description. Industry commenters agreed that staff should be knowledgeable in the use of equipment but asserted that training in the use of all equipment in a movie theater was standard practice, and therefore, such a requirement was not necessary.
Having considered these comments, the Department has decided to include in the NPRM proposed § 36.303(g)(6), which states, "movie theaters must ensure that there be at least one individual on location at each facility available to assist patrons seeking these services at all times when a captioned or audio-described movie is shown. Such assistance includes the ability to:
(i) Operate all captioning and audio-description equipment;
(ii) Locate all necessary equipment that is stored and quickly activate the equipment and any other ancillary equipment or systems required for the use of the devices; and
(iii) Communicate effectively with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and blind or have low vision regarding the uses of, and potential problems with, the equipment for such captioning or audio description."
The Department believes that the requirement in § 36.303(g)(6)(iii) is necessary to ensure effective communication for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing and blind or have low vision so that they can have equal access to movie theaters. The Department notes, however, that providing effective communication about the availability of captioning would not require that the theater hire a sign language interpreter. Communication with a person who is deaf or hard of hearing about the availability of captioning or how to use the equipment involves a short and relatively simple conversation, and therefore, can easily be provided through signage, instruction guides, and exchange of written notes.
Question 15: How much additional time beyond the normal time movie theaters spend training staff would be needed to incorporate instruction in the operation and maintenance of the equipment for captioning or audio description? How much additional time do theaters anticipate spending on assisting patrons in using the captioning and audio description devices? How should the Department estimate the value of the additional time theater personnel would spend on assisting patrons in using the captioning and audio description devices? Would that additional cost be borne by the theaters, and if so, how?
V. Other Issues
Several commenters asked the Department to include a requirement that movie theaters maintain all equipment needed to provide captioning and audio description. The Department notes that § 36.211 of the title III regulation already requires that public accommodations "maintain in operable working condition those features of facilities and equipment that are required to be readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities by the Act or this part." The Department does not believe a separate requirement is necessary for equipment needed to provide captioning and audio description.
VI. Regulatory Process Matters
A. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866-Summary of Initial Regulatory Assessment
1. Background
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
In keeping with Executive Order 12866 the Department has evaluated this proposed rule to assess whether it would likely "[h]ave an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities." E.O. 12866, § 3(f)(1). The Department's Initial RA shows that this proposed regulation does not represent an economically "significant" regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866. See E.O. 12866, §§ 3(f)(1), 6(a)(3)(C). The Department's full Initial RA can be found in the docket for this proposed rule at http://www.Regulations.gov.
2. Costs-Summary of Likely Economic Impact
The Initial RA provides estimates of the total cost of the rule under Option 1 (a six-month compliance date for digital screens and a four-year compliance date for analog screens) and Option 2 (a six-month compliance date for digital screens and a deferral of new regulatory requirements on analog screens) over a 15-year time horizon. For Option 1, we estimate that the cost of the rule will range from $177.8 million to $225.9 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $219.0 million to $275.7 million when using a 3 percent discount rate. For Option 2, we estimate that the cost of the rule will range from $138.1 million to $186.2 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $169.3 million to $226.0 million when using a 3 percent discount rate.
The range of cost estimates for both options depends on the assumptions used regarding the extent to which theaters are or soon will be providing closed movie captioning and audio description as proposed in this rule, but independently of this rulemaking. This Initial RA estimates costs using three different baselines due to a lack of information regarding the extent to which theaters are already providing captioning and audio description as proposed in this rule. Under Option 1, each baseline assumes that 2 percent of analog theaters currently meet the requirements of this proposed rule. Under Option 2, the baselines do not make assumptions about analog screens because the rule would defer requirements on such screens to future rulemaking. SeeInitial RA section 4 for details.
* Baseline 1 (One Screen )-This baseline assumes that on average, every movie theater with digital screens has one screen that is captioning enabled[39]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn39> (based on an assumption of at least some compliance with the existing ADA requirements that public accommodations provide effective communication to persons with hearing and vision disabilities). This assumption leads to an estimate of about 13 percent of all digital screens having captioning capabilities. For Option 1, this baseline also assumes that 2 percent of analog screens are captioning enabled.
* Baseline 2 (Litigation-Based)-This baseline is derived using available data regarding movie theater companies that are now providing captioning and that have been involved in recent litigation challenging their failure to comply with existing ADA effective communication requirements. This baseline assumes that 42 percent of digital screens are captioning enabled. For Option 1, this baseline also assumes that 2 percent of analog screens are captioning enabled.
* Baseline 3 (2013 NATO Survey-Based)-This baseline uses data provided in testimony by officials from the NATO before Congress in May 2013, in which 53 percent of digital screens were described as already captioning enabled. For Option 1, this baseline also assumes that 2 percent of analog screens are captioning enabled.
Costs are estimated over a 15-year period, beginning with the year in which the rule becomes effective (assumed to be 2015). For both options, costs are estimated for theaters with digital screens beginning in the first year after publication of the final rule (2015). For Option 1, costs are estimated for theaters with analog screens beginning in the fourth year after publication of the final rule (2018).
The estimated costs primarily consist of the following: (1) the purchase of hardware and software to send the captions to users' individual devices; (2) the purchase of individual devices as per the scoping requirements specified in the rule; (3) periodic costs to replace hardware, software, and devices; (4) annual operations and maintenance costs to cover storage, management, staff training, and other recurring costs; (5) any additional hardware costs to transmit audio description to individual devices; and (6) any additional costs associated with the purchase of additional of individual audio-description listening devices. The costs do not include the costs to theaters to convert their screens from analog to digital, because this rule does not require any movie theater to convert to digital cinema, and doing so is not necessary to comply with the proposed requirements.
Estimated Costs Under Option 1 (2015 Dollars, 15-year Time Horizon)
Discount Rate

Under Baseline 1 Assumptions - One Screen

Under Baseline 2 Assumptions - Litigation-Based

Under Baseline 3 Assumptions - NATO Survey Based

(millions $)

(millions $)

(millions $)

7%

$225.9

$191.9

$177.8

3%

$275.7

$235.6

$219.0

Estimated Costs Under Option 2 (2015 Dollars, 15-year Time Horizon)
Discount Rate

Under Baseline 1 Assumptions - One Screen

Under Baseline 2 Assumptions - Litigation-Based

Under Baseline 3 Assumptions - NATO Survey Based

(millions $)

(millions $)

(millions $)

7%

$186.2

$152.2

$138.1

3%

$226.0

$186.0

$169.3

Under Option 1, the estimated annualized costs of the proposed regulation under each of the three baseline scenarios range from $19.5 million to $24.8 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $18.3 million to $23.1 million when using a 3 percent discount rate. Under Option 2, the estimated annualized costs of the proposed regulation under each of the three baseline scenarios range from $15.2 million to $20.4 million when using a 7 percent discount rate, and from $14.2 million to $18.9 million when using a 3 percent discount rate.[40]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn40>
The Initial RA shows that estimated annual costs for this proposed rule will not exceed $100 million in any year under any of three baseline scenarios, irrespective of which option the Department selects for analog screens. Annual costs for each year during the 15-year expected term of the proposed regulation are depicted in the following figures:
Annual Costs of Rule Under Option 1, Discounted at 7 Percent
[cid:image005.png at 01CFA80B.B11231E0]
Annual Costs of Rule Under Option 2, Discounted at 7 Percent
[cid:image006.png at 01CFA80B.B11231E0]
Because movie theater complexes vary greatly by number of screens, which significantly impacts overall costs per facility, the analysis breaks the movie exhibition industry into four theater types based on size-Megaplexes (16 or more screens), Multiplexes (8-15 screens), Miniplexes (2-7 screens), and Single Screen Theaters-and by digital or analog system. Per-facility costs were then calculated for each theater type. The largest costs per year for any single movie theater would occur in the first year due to the purchase of necessary equipment. The first year's costs for digital Megaplex theaters are estimated to total $38,547, while comparable costs for digital single screen theaters would total $3,198.[41]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn41>
Per Digital Theater Initial Capital Costs for Captioning and Audio Description (Equipment (hardware, software and devices), 2015 Dollars*
Digital Theater Type/Size

Initial Capital Costs
(Using Doremi Technology for Movies in Digital Format)

Initial Capital Costs
Technology for Movies in Digital Format)

Average Initial Capital Costs for Digital Theater
(Average of Different Technology)

Megaplex

$40,540

$36,554

$38,547

Multiplex

$27,880

$25,798

$26,839

Miniplex

$10,920

$10,252

$10,586

Single Screen

$3,285

$3,111

$3,198

Note: These initial capital costs include the costs to purchase and install: (1) captioning hardware and software (one per screen); (2) individual devices for captioning (ranging from 4 for Single Screens to 34 for Megaplexes); (3) additional hardware, if needed, to transmit audio description (from none to one device per screen); and (4) additional devices for audio description (ranging from 2 for Single Screens to 18 for Megaplexes).
* Because unit costs for captioning and audio description equipment have either remained steady or declined between 2010 and 2013, they are assumed to remain constant from 2013 (when last researched) to 2015, when the final rule is expected to be published.
Should the Department proceed under Option 1 and cover analog screens, per theater costs for analog theaters would be higher than those for digital theaters for each type/size.[42]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn42> The first year costs for analog single screen theaters, which are measured in year four, would total $8,172. The first year costs for digital single screen theaters, which are measured in year one, would average $3,198.
Per Analog Theater Initial Capital Costs of Captioning and Audio Description Equipment (hardware, software and devices), 2015 Dollars*
Analog Theater Type/Size

Per Theater Initial Capital Costs
(Rear Window Technology for Analog Films)

Megaplex**

NA

Multiplex**

NA

Miniplex

$31,884

Single Screen

$8,172

Note: These first year costs include (1) the costs to purchase and install: captioning hardware and software (one per screen); (2) individual devices for captioning (ranging from 4 for Single Screens to 34 for Megaplexes); (3) additional hardware, if needed, to transmit audio description (from none to one device per screen); and (4) additional individual audio description listening devices (ranging from 2 for Single Screens to 18 for Megaplexes).
* Since unit costs for captioning and audio description equipment have either remained steady or declined between 2010 and 2013, they are assumed to remain constant from 2013 (when last researched) to 2015, when the final rule is expected to be published.
** Note that the Initial RA assumes that all Megaplexes and Multiplexes have transitioned to digital projection systems by the time this rule goes into effect.
In addition, the Initial RA uses a value equivalent to 3 percent of all the captioning and audio-descriptive equipment owned by the theater to capture any operations and maintenance costs including the incremental increase to staff time, the costs of adding information that captioning or audio description is available when preparing communications regarding movie offerings, and other potential increases in administrative costs. These costs are annual. This 3 percent is a factor commonly used in construction and equipment maintenance. See Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Revised Regulations Implementing Titles II and III of the ADA, app. 3.I (Sept. 15, 2010), available at http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/RIA_2010regs/ria_appendix03.htm#ai(last visited July 14, 2014).
In dollar terms, operations, maintenance, and training costs for analog theaters are estimated on an annual basis to average from a low of $245 for Single Screens to a high of $957 for Miniplexes; for digital theaters' operations, maintenance and training costs are estimated to average from a low of $96 for Single Screens to a high of $1,156 for Megaplexes.
Question 16: The Department invites comment on the Initial RA's methodology, cost assumptions, and cost estimates, including the specific costs of purchasing, installing and replacing captioning and audio description equipment, and the costs of complying with the training and notice requirements of the rule. The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments about the frequency with which captioning and audio description devices need to be replaced. The Department is also interested in estimates of how much time it would take for theaters to acquire the equipment needed to comply with this rule.
3. Benefits-Qualitative Discussion of Benefits
The benefits of this rule are difficult to quantify for multiple reasons. The Department has not been able to locate robust data on the rate at which persons with disabilities currently go to movies shown in movie theaters. In addition, as a result of this rule, the following number of persons will change by an unknown amount: (1) the number of persons with disabilities who will newly go to movies, (2) the number of persons with disabilities who will go to movies more often, (3) the number of persons who will go to the movies as part of a larger group that includes a person with a disability, and (4) the number of persons with disabilities who would have gone to the movies anyway but under the rule will have a fuller and more pleasant experience. In addition, the Department does not know precisely how many movie theaters currently screen movies with closed captioning and audio description, or how many people with hearing or vision disabilities currently have consistent access to movie theaters that provide closed captioning and audio description. Finally, the Department is not aware of any peer reviewed academic or professional studies that monetize or quantify the societal benefit of providing closed captioning and audio description at movie theaters
The individuals who will directly benefit from this rule are those persons with hearing or vision disabilities who, as a result of this rule, would be able for the first time to attend movies with closed captioning or audio description in theaters across the country on a consistent basis. Individuals who will indirectly benefit from this rule are the family and friends of persons with hearing and vision disabilities who would be able to share the movie-going experience more fully with their friends or loved ones with hearing and vision disabilities.
Data on movie-going patterns of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision is very limited, making estimations of demand very difficult. However, numerous public comments suggest that many persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision do not go to the movies at all, or attend movies well below the national average of 4.1 annual admissions per person, because of the lack of auxiliary aids and services that would allow them to understand and enjoy the movie.
Though we cannot confidently estimate the likely number of people who would directly benefit from this proposed rule, we have reviewed data on the number of people in the United States with hearing and vision disabilities. The Census Bureau estimates that 3.3 percent of the U.S. population has difficulty seeing, which translates into a little more than eight million individuals in 2010, and a little more than two million of those had "severe" difficulty seeing.[43]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn43> At the same time, the Census Bureau estimates that 3.1 percent of people had difficulty hearing, which was a little more than 7.5 million individuals in 2010, and approximately one million of them had "severe" difficulty hearing. Not all of these people would benefit from this proposed rule. For example, some people's hearing or vision disability may not be such that they would need closed captioning or audio description. Some people with hearing or vision disabilities may not use the equipment for a variety of reasons, including finding the equipment uncomfortable to use. Some people with hearing or vision disabilities may already have consistent access to theaters that screen all their movies with closed captioning and audio description. And some theaters may not provide closed captioning and audio description for all their movies because it would be an undue burden under the ADA to do so. Meanwhile, some people with hearing or vision disabilities would not attend public screenings of movies even if theaters provided closed captioning and audio description simple because they do not enjoy going out to the movies-just as is the case among persons without disabilities.[44]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn44>
In recent years, a large number of movie theaters have already invested in equipment to provide closed captioning and audio description. As noted earlier in this NPRM, NATO estimates that 53 percent of digital screens are already captioning and audio description enabled. However, this does not translate into an estimate that about half (or 53 percent) of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision are now benefiting from captioning or audio description. There are multiple reasons why, even if we accept this estimate of the current availability of captioning and audio description, that it does not translate into direct benefits for all those who could benefit. Such reasons include the following: (1) only some screens at some theaters may have closed captioning and audio description capabilities and those may not be showing the movie the person wants to see, (2) the theater may not be showing the desired movie with closed captions and audio description on a convenient day or at a convenient time, (3) the theater may be located much farther away from where the person with a disability resides than other, less accessible theaters, which may result in a decision not to go to a movie theater at all, or (4) a person may live in a community that has theaters with closed captioning and audio description capability but may travel (for vacation, to visit relatives, for work, or other reasons) to a community that does not have theaters that are captioning and audio description enabled.
Not only is the estimate of the number of who might directly benefit from the proposed rule uncertain, but the individual benefits are not uniform because persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision are likely to benefit from this proposed rule in different ways and realize benefits in different amounts. The type and amount of benefits can depend on personal circumstances and preferences, as well as proximity to movie theaters that otherwise would not offer captioning or audio description but for this proposed rule. Some persons with vision and hearing disabilities have effectively been precluded from going to movies at theaters because the only theaters available to them did not offer closed captioning or audio description, offered open captioning but only at inconvenient times (such as the middle of the day during the week), or offered captioning or audio description for only a few films and not for every screening of those films. For these persons, the primary benefit will be the ability to see movies when released in movie theaters along with other movie patrons that they otherwise would not have had the opportunity to do. They will have the value of that movie-going experience, as well as the opportunity to discuss the film socially at the same time as the rest of the movie-viewing public. The amount of benefit experienced by a person with a vision or hearing disability who previously had no access to a theater that provided closed captioning or audio description at all its screenings will be different than the amount experienced by a person with a hearing or vision disability who previously had access to a theater that did consistently provide closed captioning and audio description at its screenings. In addition, the amount of benefit from this rule experienced by a person who cannot follow a movie at all without the assistance of closed captioning is likely to be greater than the amount of benefit experienced by a person who can follow parts of a movie without the assistance of closed captioning.
In addition to the direct beneficiaries of the proposed rule discussed above, others may be indirect beneficiaries of this rule. Family and friends of persons with these disabilities who wish to go to the movies all together as a shared social experience will now have greater opportunities to do so. More adults who visit elderly parents with hearing or sight limitations would presumably be able to take their parents on outings and enjoy a movie at a theater together, sharing the experience as they may have in the past.
The Department received numerous comments from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision in response to its 2010 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Movie Captioning and Video Description in Movie Theaters describing how they were unable to take part in the movie-going experience with their friends and family because of the unavailability of captioning or audio description. Many individuals felt that this not only affected their ability to socialize and fully take part in family outings, but also deprived them of the opportunity to meaningfully engage in the discourse that often surrounds movie attendance. Parents with disabilities also complained that they could not answer their children's questions about a movie they saw together because the parents did not understand what had happened in the movie.
Of perhaps greater significance to the discussion of the benefits of this rule, however, are issues relating to fairness, equity, and equal access, all of which are extremely difficult to monetize, and the Department has not been able to robustly quantify and place a dollar value on those benefits. Regardless, the Department believes the non-quantifiable benefits justify the costs of requiring captioning and audio description at movie theaters nationwide.
Annualized Costs and Benefits of Proposed Rule (2015 Dollars, 15-year Time Horizon)

7% Discount Rate

3% Discount Rate


Baseline 1 Assumptions (One Screen )

Baseline 2 Assumptions (Litigation-Based)

Baseline 3 Assumptions (NATO Survey Based)

Baseline 1 Assumptions (One Screen )

Baseline 2 Assumptions (Litigation-Based)

Baseline 3 Assumptions (NATO Survey Based)

Costs
(million $)

Option 1 - Four Year Compliance for Analog Screens

$24.8

$21.1

$19.5

$23.1

$19.7

$18.3

Option 2 - Deferred Rulemaking for Analog Screens

$20.4

$16.7

$15.2

$18.9

$15.6

$14.2

Benefits

The proposed rule would address the discriminatory effects of communication barriers at movie theaters encountered by individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or are blind or have low vision. By ensuring that movie theaters screen those movies that are produced and distributed with the necessary auxiliary aids and services-captioning and audio description-and that theaters provide the individual devices needed to deliver these services to patrons with these particular disabilities, this rule would afford such individuals an equal opportunity to attend movies and follow both the audio and visual aspects of movies exhibited at movie theaters. Although the Department is unable to monetize or quantify the benefits of this proposed rule, it would have important benefits. For example, it would provide people with hearing and vision disabilities better access to the movie viewing experience enjoyed by others; it would allow such persons to attend and enjoy movies with their family members and acquaintances; it would allow people with hearing or vision disabilities to participate in conversations about movies with family members and acquaintances; and it would promote other hard-to-quantify benefits recognized in Executive Order 13563 such as equity, human dignity, and fairness.

Question 17: The Department invites comment on methods and data for monetizing or quantifying the societal benefits of the proposed regulation, including benefits to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision, as well as to other members of the movie-going public or other entities. For example, the Department invites comments on methods and data for estimating the number of people with vision or hearing disabilities who would benefit from this rule, and addressing the challenges noted above in developing such an estimate, as well as comments on methods and data that could be used to estimate the value of the different types of benefits noted above. The Department also invites comments on its qualitative discussion of the benefits of this rule, which include equity, human dignity, and fairness.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act-Impact on Small Businesses
1. Small Business Threshold Assessment-Methodology and Summary of Results
Consistent with the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Department has also carefully considered the likely impact of the proposed regulation on small businesses in the movie exhibition industry. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b); Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Regulatory Flexibility, Small Business, and Job Creation, 76 FR 3827 (Jan. 18, 2011). The Department has determined that this proposed rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
For motion picture theaters, small businesses constitute the vast majority of firms in the industry. The current size standard for a small movie theater business is $35.5 million dollars in annual revenue. In 2007, the latest year for which detailed breakouts by industry and annual revenue are available, approximately 98 percent of movie theater firms met the standard for small business, and these firms managed approximately 53 percent of movie theater establishments.[45]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn45> As noted earlier, the Department is considering two options for analog screens. Option 1 would delay the compliance date for analog screens for four years after publication of the final rule. Option 2 would defer rulemaking altogether for analog screens until a later date. The IRFA estimates for Option 1 the average initial capital costs per firm for firms that display digital or analog movies. The average costs for small firms are estimated to be between 0.7 percent to 2.1 percent of their average annual receipts for firms with digital theaters, and between 2.0 percent to 5.7 percent of average annual receipts for firms with analog theaters. The Department has used the IRFA to examine other ways, if possible, to accomplish the Department's goals with fewer burdens on small businesses. The vast majority of theaters with analog screens are small businesses and the Department believes that both of the options for analog screens under consideration in the proposed rule will result in fewer burdens on small movie theater businesses with analog screens.
2. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
a. Summary of Reasons for Proposed Regulation
Because the Department's rationale for proposing these requirements for movie captioning and audio description have already been discussed in full throughout this preamble (see, e.g., section II.C, supra), such reasoning is merely summarized here. There are, in sum, four primary reasons why the Department is proposing regulatory action at this time. First, for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision, the unavailability of captioned or audio-described movies inhibits their ability to socialize and fully take part in social and family outings and deprives them of the opportunity to meaningfully participate in an important aspect of American culture. Second, a significant-and increasing-proportion of Americans have hearing or vision limitations that prevent them from fully and effectively understanding movies without auxiliary aids such as captioning and audio description. Third, technological advancements mean not only that an ever-increasing number of movie theaters have been converted to digital cinema systems, but also that such theaters can exhibit movies with closed captions using commercially-available equipment at relatively low cost. And, lastly, despite the availability of these auxiliary aids and the general ADA obligation to provide effective communication to patrons with disabilities, individuals with disabilities in many parts of the United States continue to lack access to movies with captioning and audio description. Movie theaters' collective compliance efforts to date simply have not resulted in equal access to movies exhibited at theaters nationwide for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. The Department is thus convinced that regulation is warranted at this time to explicitly require movie theaters to exhibit movies with closed captioning and audio description at all times and for all showings whenever movies are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with captioning and audio description, unless to do so would result in an undue burden or fundamental alteration. This proposed regulation is necessary in order to achieve the goals and promise of the ADA.
b. Summary of Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Proposed Regulation
The proposed rule for captioning and audio description rests on the existing obligation of title III-covered facilities-such as movie theaters-to ensure that persons with disabilities receive "full and equal enjoyment" of their respective goods and services, including, as needed, the provision of auxiliary aids and services for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. The proposed rule states that a movie theater owner or operator is required to exhibit movies with closed captioning and audio description for all screenings so long as the movie has been produced by the movie studio or distributor with captioning or audio description (unless doing so would result in an undue burden or fundamental alteration). The proposed rule imposes no independent obligation on movie theaters to provide captions and audio description if the movie is not available with these features.
The Department expects that implementation of the proposed rule will lead to consistent levels of accessibility in movie theaters across the country, and that patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision will be able to use captioning or audio description equipment to better understand movies being exhibited in movies theaters.
The legal basis for the Department's proposed regulation-discussed at length in other parts of this preamble (seesection II.B, supra)-rests on both title III of the ADA and its existing implementing regulation. Title III prohibits public accommodations, which, by statutory definition, include movie theaters, from discriminating against any individual on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of their goods and services. 42 U.S.C. 12182(a). Further, of particular import to the proposed regulation, title III also requires public accommodations to take whatever affirmative steps may be necessary "to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently * * * because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services" absent a showing of fundamental alteration or undue burden by such public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii).
The Department's recently-revised title III regulation reiterates these statutory requirements-which were first incorporated into the implementing regulation in 1991-and emphasizes that the overarching obligation of a public accommodation is to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities through the provision of necessary auxiliary aids and services. 28 CFR 36.303(c). While the type of auxiliary aid or service necessary to ensure effective communication depends on several factors, including the method of communication used by the individual and the communication involved, closed captioning and audio recordings are specifically referenced as aids or services contemplated by the rule. 28 CFR 36.303(b)(1), (2). Here, in the context of movie screenings at movie theaters, captioning is the only auxiliary aid presently available that effectively communicates the dialogue and sounds in a movie to individuals who are deaf or whose hearing impairments otherwise preclude effective use of assistive listening systems. [46]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn46> Likewise, for individuals who are blind or who have low vision, the only auxiliary aid presently available that effectively communicates the visual components of a movie is audio description.
c. Estimated Number and Type of Small Entities in the Movie Exhibition Industry
The Regulatory Flexibility Act defines a"small entity" as a small business (as defined by the Small Business Administration Size Standards) or a small organization such as a nonprofit that is "independently owned and operated" and is "not dominant in its field." 5 U.S.C. 601(6); see id. 601(3) and (4); 15 U.S.C. 632. For motion picture theaters (North American Industry Classification System Code 512131), small businesses constitute the vast majority of firms in the industry. The current size standard for a small movie theater business is $35.5 million dollars in annual revenue. [47]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn47> In 2007, the latest year for which detailed breakouts by industry and annual revenue are available, approximately 98 percent of movie theater firms met the standard for small business, and these firms managed approximately 53 percent of movie theater establishments. Data from the 2007 Economic Census, prepared for the Small Business Administration (SBA) and downloaded from its Web site, report that 2,004 movie theater firms operated 4,801 establishments that year; of those 2,004 movie theater firms, approximately 1,965 would meet the current SBA standard for a small business.[48]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn48> These 1,965 firms operated 2,566 establishments.
Distribution of Movie Theater Firms, by Revenue, 2007

Number of firms

Number of establish-ments

Firms as % of TOTAL

Cumulative total

Establish-ments % of TOTAL

Cumulative total

Total Firms

2,004

4,801

100%

--

100%

--

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue less than $100,000

333

333

16.6%

16.6%

6.9%

6.9%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $100,000 to $499,999

703

712

35.1%

51.7%

14.8%

21.8%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $500,000 to $999,999

318

339

15.9%

67.6%

7.1%

28.8%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $1,000,000 to $2,499,999

386

472

19.3%

86.8%

9.8%

38.7%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $2,500,000 to $4,999,999

109

197

5.4%

92.3%

4.1%

42.8%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $5,000,000 to $7,499,999

40

99

2.0%

94.3%

2.1%

44.8%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $7,500,000-$9,999,999

24

60

1.2%

95.5%

1.2%

46.1%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $10,000,000 to $14,999,999

23

106

1.1%

96.6%

2.2%

48.3%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $15,000,000 to $19,999,999

13

105

0.6%

97.3%

2.2%

50.5%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $20,000,000 to $24,999,999

6

50

0.3%

97.6%

1.0%

51.5%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $25,000,000 to $29,999,999

8

79

0.4%

98.0%

1.6%

53.2%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $30,000,000 to $34,999,999

2

14

0.1%

98.1%

0.3%

53.4%

Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $35,000,000+*

39

2,235

1.9%

100.0%

46.6%

100.0%

* Firms with sale/receipts/revenue of higher than $35,500,000 are not considered small businesses under SBA size standards. The SBA database presents data for these firms in six categories, which have been consolidated into one for this table.
Source: number of firms and number of establishments from Small Business Administration, Statistics of U.S. Businesses, Business Dynamics Statistics, Business Employment Dynamics, and Nonemployer Statistics. http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/849/12162 (last visited July 14, 2014). Downloaded from SBA web site December 2013.
As part of a larger movement within the film producing industry, nearly all (if not all) film production is moving to digital, and the vast majority of, if not nearly all, movie theaters likely will convert to the digital format. Because of the cost of transitioning to digital, large firms are more likely to have already converted to digital, or plan to do so soon. For these same reasons, analog theaters are more likely to be small businesses. At the same time, per screen costs of captioning equipment are significantly higher for analog theaters than for digital theaters.
While the first movie theaters were facilities with a single screen and auditorium, in recent years larger facilities are being built, some with a dozen or more auditoriums and screens each capable of showing movies at the same time. Yet, at this time, many single screen theaters remain open. The Initial RA prepared detailed costs estimates, over time, using four theater size categories based on data presented by the MPAA. To estimate the costs to small businesses, this IRFA examined the percentages of small businesses and the distribution of theaters and screens by theater size type, and made estimations regarding the likely prevalence of small businesses among each size type (see the table below). No Megaplexes are expected to be small businesses.
Theaters by Type and Estimated Prevalence of Small Businesses
Theater Type

Projected Number of Theaters in 2015

Annual Growth Rate

Likelihood of Small Businesses

Megaplex - 16+ screens

718

2.0%

No small businesses

Multiplex - 8-15 screens

1,893

2.0%

Some small businesses

Miniplex - 2-7 screens

1,500

-4.2%

Many small businesses

Single Screen - 1 screen

996

-4.2%

Nearly all small businesses

TOTAL

5,107

---

Source: Estimated using data for 2008-2012 as in MPAA, Theatrical Market Statistics (2012), available athttp://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2012-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-Report.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
Estimates of Digital and Analog Theaters and Screens in 2015

Number of Digital Theaters

Number of Digital Screens

Number of Analog Theaters

Number of Analog Screens

Megaplex - 16+ screens

718

12,924

0

0

Multiplex - 8-15 screens

1,893

20,823

0

0

Miniplex - 2-7 screens

452

1,807

1,048

4,192

Single Screen - 1 screen

300

300

696

696

TOTAL

3,363

35,854

1,744

4,888

The proposed rule does not apply different requirements to firms by size. It does, however, seek public comment on two options for theaters with analog screens. Option 1 would delay the compliance date for analog screens for four years after publication of the final rule. Option 2 would defer rulemaking altogether for analog screens until a later date. As stated previously, the vast majority of theaters with analog screens are small businesses, and the Department believes that both of the options for analog screens under consideration in the proposed rule will result in fewer burdens on small movie theater businesses with analog screens. While this small business assessment necessarily draws on the Initial RA's "main"cost model, it also incorporates data specific to small businesses. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act,[49]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn49> the cost model underlying the Initial RA's small business assessment uses SBA-defined small business size standards.[50]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn50> A dataset downloaded from SBA's Web site presents data for 18 different revenue size categories (12 of those categories for firms with estimated annual receipts of less than the $35.5 million size standard for a small firm in this industry). These 18 revenue size categories were consolidated into four categories, with the following three meeting the SBA size standard for a small business: Firms with sales/receipts/revenue of (a) $499,999 and under; (b) $500,000-$4,999,999; and (c) $5,000,000-$ 35,500,000. One of the 18 revenue categories in the SBA dataset (firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $30,000,000-$34,999,999) had only two firms included. To prevent the release of proprietary financial information, the SBA dataset only includes the number of firms and their establishments in this category; it does not include any information on sales, receipts or revenues. Therefore, while the estimate of the total number of small businesses that could be impacted by the proposed rule includes these two firms, the calculations for costs of compliance by revenue category do not.
Question 18a: Numbers of Small Businesses
The Department is interested in receiving comments and data on all of the assumptions regarding the numbers of small entities impacted by this regulation, particularly on the numbers of small entities that have digital or analog screens (or both), the number of screens in each theater, the type of movies shown at these theatres (first-run commercial films, independent films, etc.), and the type of captioning equipment and devices these theatres already have. The Department is particularly interested in data regarding small analog theatres, such as the availability of analog film prints, the availability of movies with captions and audio description (in both analog and digital formats), the rate at which small theatres are converting to digital cinema, and the economic viability of both small analog and small digital theatres. The Department would also be interested in data on the number of analog and digital theaters by theater type and annual receipts. Finally, the Department is interested in whether and to what extent small analog and small digital theaters are participating in certain cost-sharing programs to help convert theaters to digital technology, such as a virtual print fee (VPF) program. If they are not participating in such cost-sharing programs, why not? (See Question 1 for additional questions about analog theatres).
Question 18b: Numbers of Small Nonprofit Entities
The Department seeks comment and data on small nonprofits that operate theatres that would be covered by this proposed rule, particularly on the number of small entities in this category, and the potential costs and economic impacts of the proposed rule. Should the Department adopt a different compliance schedule for these theaters?
d. Estimated Cost of Compliance for Small Entities[51]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn51>
The SBA/U.S. Economic Census data was incorporated into the Initial RA's estimation for impacts on small businesses. First, receipt data was used to develop assumptions regarding the distribution of "small businesses" among the four theater size types. The assignment of theater size type is critical to the estimation because it determines the number of screens and, therefore, total costs per establishment.
Using the Initial RA cost model estimation of the number of theaters by size type in 2015, the IRFA distributed the number of establishments of small business movie theater firms beginning with all Single Screen establishments and then applied the remaining portion to Miniplex and Multiplex establishments.
2015 Distribution of Theaters (Model Projection)
Theater Size Type

Number of Theaters

Percentage

Megaplex

718

14.1%

Multiplex

1,893

37.1%

Miniplex

1,500

29.4%

Single Screen

996

19.5%

TOTAL

5,107

100%

For this distribution, Single Screen theaters made up 89.6 percent of establishments in the smallest revenue category. The remaining establishments in this category were assumed to be Miniplexes. All of the establishments with receipts between $500,000 and $4,999,999 were assumed to be Miniplex theaters. After allocating those theaters, the remaining Miniplex theaters estimated for 2015 were distributed to the largest revenue category. Because there were more theaters in the largest revenue category than the remaining estimated Miniplex theaters, the other theaters in this revenue category were assumed to be all Multiplexes (approximately 41 percent). These distributions are summarized below. These distributions were then used to estimate the average cost per firm in each of the three consolidated small business revenue categories.
Distribution of Theater Size Type for Consolidated Revenue Groups
Consolidated Revenue Group[52]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn52>

Theater Size Type

$499,999 and under

89.6% Single Screen, 10.4% Miniplexes

$500,000-$4,999,999

100% Miniplexes

$5,000,000 to $35,500,000

58.8% Miniplexes; 41.2% Multiplexes

Theater Equipment Requirements Based on Scoping and Theater Size
Equipment

Megaplex
Avg: 18 Screens

Multiplex
Avg: 11 Screens

Miniplex
Avg: 4 Screens

Single Screen

Captioning Hardware and Devices

Captioning Hardware Needed

18

11

4

1

Captioning Devices Needed

34

28

12

4

Descriptive Listening Hardware and Devices

Audio Hardware Needed

18

11

4

1

Audio Devices Needed

18

11

4

2

Using the average costs per theater developed in the Initial RA, we were able to calculate the average costs per theater and per firm for the three consolidated revenue groups ($499,999 and under; $500,000-$4,999,999; and $5,000,000-$35,500,000). Costs were first calculated on a per-establishment basis, and then using the average number of establishments per firm for each of the three consolidated revenue groups, translated into an average per firm cost. This cost was then compared to the average receipts per firm for that consolidated revenue group.
The resulting ratio of average costs to average receipts ranges from a low of 0.7 percent (for digital firms with revenues of $5,000,000 to $35,500,000) to a high of 5.7 percent (for analog firms with revenues of $499,999 or less). The impact on firms with digital projection is comparatively smaller than the impact on firms maintaining analog projection. The ratio of average costs/receipts is estimated to range from 0.7 percent to 2.1 percent for all movie theater companies using digital systems. In contrast, the same ratio ranges from 2.0 percent to 5.7 percent for all firms using analog projection.
Estimation of Costs for Small Movie Theaters, By Firm Size, Based on 2015 Size/Revenue Distribution
Cost

Firms $499,999 and under

Firms $500,000 to $4,999,999

Firms $5,000,000 to $35,500,000**

Digital

Average receipts per firm*

$188,384 to $201,973

$1,471,549 to $1,484,995

$9,705,377 to $12,437,259

Average cost per theater*

$3,198 to $3,966

$10,063 to $10,586

$13,984 to $17,281

Average cost per firm*

$3,233 to $3,992

$12, 539 to $14,454

$81, 176 to $103,309

Ratio of average cost/receipts*

1.6% to 2.1%

0.8% to 1.0%

0.7% to 1.1%

Analog

Average receipts per firm*

$188,384 to $201,973

$1,471,549 to $1,484,995

$9,705,377 to $12,437,259

Average cost per theater*

$8,172 to $10,638

$30,204 to $31,884

$43,449 to $54,673

Average cost per firm*

$8,263 to $10,706

$37,638 to $43,534

$252,224 to $326,844

Ratio of average cost/receipts*

4.1% to 5.7%

2.5% to 3.0%

2.0% to 3.4%

* The ranges represent the figures calculated using the two datasets created from data from the 2007 Economic Census, which breaks out data by revenue category (downloaded from SBA's Web site (http://www.sba.gov) and the Census Bureau's American FactFinder Web site (http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml), respectively), but which differ slightly. Note that the composition of theater size types also varies per revenue group depending on the dataset used, and therefore the average cost per theater varies as well.
** Note that the calculations for this category using the dataset downloaded from the SBA Web site do not include any data for the two firms in the revenue category for firms with sales/receipts/revenue of $30,000,000-$34,999,999 because no data on annual receipts for those two firms was included. The dataset downloaded from American FactFinder had different revenue categories from those downloaded from SBA's Web site. To estimate those firms meeting the SBA size standards using the dataset downloaded from the American FactFinder Web site, all the firms with revenues less than $25 million, and half of those with revenues from $25,000,000 to $49,999,999 were counted as a way of estimating the number of entities that fall under $35.5 million within that revenue category.
Average capital costs per theater type were estimated by multiplying the number of screens by the required analog or digital equipment and the scoped number of devices. These average costs are presented below.
Estimated Average Receipts and Costs per Firm, Digital and Analog

Digital

Analog

Size of firms ($)

Average receipts per firm

Average cost per theater

Average cost per firm

Ratio of average cost/ receipts

Average receipts per firm

Average cost per theater

Average cost per firm

Ratio of average cost/ receipts

Less than $100,000

$52,264

$3,198

$3,198

6.1%

$52,264

$8,172

$8,172

15.6%

$100,000-499,000

$252,862

$4,326

$4,381

1.7%

$252,862

$11,791

$11,942

4.7%

$500,000-999,000

$711,456

$10,586

$11,285

1.6%

$711,456

$31,884

$33,990

4.8%

$1,000,000-2,499,000

$1,581,824

$10,586

$12,945

0.8%

$1,581,824

$31,884

$38,988

2.5%

$2,500,000-4,999,000

$3,298,550

$10,586

$19,132

0.6%

$3,298,550

$31,884

$57,625

1.7%

$5,000,000-7,499,000

$5,888,575

$10,586

$26,200

0.4%

$5,888,575

$31,884

$78,913

1.3%

$7,500,000-9,999,000

$7,954,042

$10,586

$26,465

0.3%

$7,954,042

$31,884

$79,710

1.0%

$10,000,000-14,999,000

$9,927,478

$10,586

$48,788

0.5%

$9,927,478

$31,884

$146,944

1.5%

$15,000,000-19,999,000

$14,045,000

$22,436

$181,213

1.3%

$14,045,000

$72,219

$583,306

4.2%

$20,000,000-24,999,000

$16,288,167

$26,839

$223,658

1.4%

$16,288,167

$87,206

$726,717

4.5%

$25,000,000-29,999,000

$21,415,875

$26,839

$265,035

1.2%

$21,415,875

$87,206

$861,159

4.0%

Based on data from Small Business Administration, Statistics of U.S. Businesses, Business Dynamics Statistics, Business Employment Dynamics, and Nonemployer Statistics, available at http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/849/12162(data downloaded Dec. 2013). See Table 38 in the Initial Regulatory Assessment and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (available at http://www.ada.gov) for more information on how the figures in this table were calculated.
Digital Captioning Equipment Unit Costs
Technology

Digital Captioning Hardware Cost
(one needed per screen)

Digital Captioning Individual Device Costs
(multiple per screen/theater may be needed)

Digital Audio Description Hardware Cost
(one needed per screen)

Digital Audio Description Individual Device Costs
(multiple per screen/theater may be needed)

Doremi's CaptiView

$690

$430

$625

$125

USL

$1,057

$479

$0

$69

Analog Captioning Equipment Unit Costs
Technology

Analog Captioning Hardware Cost
(one per screen needed)

Analog Captioning Device Costs
(multiple per screen/theater may be needed)

Analog Audio Description Hardware Cost
(one per screen needed)

Analog Audio Description Device Costs
(multiple per screen/theater may be needed)

Rear Window[53]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn53>

$7,113

$95

$467

$106

Average per Establishment Costs of Purchasing Digital Closed Captioning and Audio Description Equipment
Cost Per Digital Theater

Doremi

USL

Average Digital Cost

Megaplex*

$40,540

$36,554

$38,547

Multiplex

$27,880

$25,798

$26,839

Miniplex

$10,920

$10,252

$10,586

Single Screen

$3,285

$3,111

$3,198

* Note that the Initial RA assumes that no small business firm has Megaplexes; this data is presented for informational purposes only, to help illustrate the differences in average costs per digital theaters by type.
Average per Establishment Costs of Purchasing Analog Closed Captioning and Audio Description Equipment
Cost Per Analog Theater[54]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn54>

Rear Window

Megaplex

**

Multiplex

**

Miniplex

$31,884

Single Screen

$8,172

** Note that the Initial RA assumes that all Megaplexes and Multiplexes have transitioned to digital projection systems by the time this rule goes into effect.
Question 19: Small Business Compliance Costs
The Department seeks comment and data on the small business compliance cost estimates, including the costs associated with procuring and maintaining digital and analog equipment, the availability of this equipment, estimates of the average cost of this proposed rule by establishment and firm, and the ratio of average costs of this proposed rule to firm receipts. The Department is interested in comment on whether small theaters will incur higher prices in the purchase and installation of this equipment due to the lower volume needed. The Department also seeks public comment on its proposed scoping for individual captioning devices. Should the Department consider approaching scoping differently for small theatres? How so and why? (Please see Question 10 for additional questions about scoping for captioning devices). How many devices capable of transmitting audio description to individuals should each movie theater have on hand for use by patrons who are blind or have low vision? (Please see Question 12 for additional questions about scoping for audio description). Do small theaters face any additional costs not already included in these cost estimates? The Department seeks comment and data on what, if any, particular requirement of this rule would cause a small business to claim that it is an undue burden to comply with the requirements of this proposed rule.
e. Projected Reporting, Record-Keeping Requirements and Other Compliance Requirements of the Rule
As noted below in section VI.F, discussing the Paperwork Reduction Act, the proposed regulation imposes no reporting or record-keeping requirements on any movie theaters regardless of size. The Department acknowledges that there may be other compliance-related administrative costs incurred by all movie theaters-including small entities-as a result of the proposed regulation, including such tasks as having theater staff keep track of individual captioning devices or audio description headsets. However, such compliance costs are expected to be neither disproportionately borne by small entities nor significant. The proposed scoping requirements for individual captioning devices are directly proportional to total seat count or screen. The proposed scoping for individual audio-description devices is minimal and only applies to those theaters that do not currently have assistive listening receivers with at least two channels. Thus, smaller movie theaters (such as Miniplexes and Single Screen Theaters) necessarily would have relatively few pieces of required captioning and audio description equipment to inventory and maintain. Moreover, any costs related to such administrative tasks are expected to be minimal. The Department has also asked whether it should take a different approach to scoping for individual captioning devices for small theaters.
The rule will require that at least one person at the theater be able to provide patrons with captioning and audio description and direct patrons on the equipment's use. This requirement can most easily be met by expanding the training for those persons who will already be required to be on-site to manage or oversee overall operations and the start of the exhibition of the movies. In addition, theaters already provide staff to distribute assistive listening devices when requested by patrons and to direct patrons on how to use those devices. It is reasonable to assume that the same staff member would provide assistance with captioning and audio description devices as well. A separate staff with ADA expertise is not required. The costs of this part of the rule will include any additional training time and any time spent providing and collecting devices and demonstrating their use, if needed.
The Initial RA uses a value equivalent to 3 percent of all the captioning and audio description equipment owned by the theater to capture the afore-discussed minimal operations and maintenance cost and incremental increase to staff time; costs of adding information that captioning or audio description is available when preparing communications regarding movie offerings, and other potential increases in administrative costs. This 3 percent is a factor commonly used in construction and equipment maintenance. See, e.g., Final Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Proposed Revised Regulations Implementing Titles II and III of the ADA, Including Revised ADA Standards for Accessible Design: Supplemental Results (Sept. 15, 2010), available at http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/RIA_2010regs/ria_supp.htm(last visited July 14, 2014).[55]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn55> The Department expects that annual operations, maintenance, and training costs for analog theaters are estimated to average from a low of $245 for Single Screens to a high of $957 for Miniplexes; for digital theaters' operations, maintenance and training costs are estimated to average from a low of $96 for Single Screens to a high of $1,156 for Megaplexes.[56]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn56>
Question 20: Other Costs for Small Businesses
The Department invites comment on the estimation of operation and maintenance costs for this proposed rule, which include administrative costs to keep track of equipment, staff training and availability (see Question 15 for additional questions related to staff training), maintenance and replacement of captioning and audio description hardware and individual devices, and the notice requirement (see Questions 14 and 16 for additional questions about the notice requirement). The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments about the costs and frequency of replacing captioning and audio description equipment. Are there other compliance costs, such as regulatory familiarization, that should be included in this small business analysis?
f. Duplicative or Overlapping Federal Rules
The Department is not aware of any existing federal regulations that impose duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting requirements relative to the requirements in the proposed movie captioning and audio description regulation.
g. Discussion of Significant Regulatory Alternatives That Minimize Impact on Small Entities
In crafting this proposed regulation for movie captioning and audio description, the Department has taken care to propose requirements that temper effectiveness with cost considerations. That is, while the Department believes this regulatory action is required to support and enforce the ADA's effective communication mandate, the proposed requirements also are intended to regulate in a manner that is cost-efficient, easily understood by the movie exhibition industry, and-to the greatest extent possible-minimizes the economic impact on small entities.
As detailed earlier in this preamble (see section IV, Section-by-Section Analysis, "Movie Captioning-Coverage, supra), the Department is proposing that all movie theaters covered by the rule, regardless of size, location, or type of movies exhibited, must exhibit captioned or audio-described movies (when available) for all screenings absent a showing of undue burden. Only such an across-the-board requirement fulfills the effective communication objective by permitting individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision disabilities to fully and equally participate in one of the most quintessential forms of American entertainment-going out to the movies-in the same manner as the rest of the movie going public.
Yet, while the proposed regulation imposes captioning and audio description requirements on all movie theaters irrespective of size, there are nonetheless several provisions that serve to ameliorate their relative economic impact on small entities. For example, the Department's regulatory proposal:

 *   Proposes two alternatives for theaters with analog screens: a four-year delayed compliance date (Option 1), or deferral of the requirements of this proposed rule for analog screens (Option 2);
 *   Establishes performance (rather than design) standards that enable small entities (as well as other movie theaters) to meet their captioning requirements in a flexible and cost-effective manner (§ 36.303(g)(2)(i));
 *   Specifies scoping requirements for individual captioning devices that are proportional to a theater's total seat count (i.e., fewer seats means fewer devices are required), thereby ensuring that small theaters have reduced device costs (§ 36.303(g)(2)(iii)(A), (g)(3)(ii));
 *   Specifies a minimal number of individual audio-description listening devices that must be provided by a theater and permits "overlap" of scoping for audio-description listening devices and assistive listening headsets so long as such headsets are capable of receiving both types of audio signals (§ 36.303(g)(3)(ii)).
Moreover, while not expressly referenced in the text of proposed § 36.303(g), the Department has reiterated-at several points in this preamble-that those movie theaters that find that it is a significant difficulty or expense to comply with the requirements of this regulation will be able to assert the "undue burden defense" (see section II.B.2 supra,for an explanation of the factors that should be considered in asserting the defense). Throughout the last two decades, even without this regulation, movie theaters have been able to assert this defense when facing litigation alleging failure to provide effective communication to patrons with disabilities. Thus, while a large movie theater trade association suggested that many-if not most-small theaters would be forced out of business unless exempted entirely from any captioning requirements, the Department believes that such dire predictions are misplaced.[57]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn57> The "undue burden" defense serves as a limit should there be regulatory compliance costs that under particular circumstances would impose significant difficulty or expense. Where the costs of screening closed-captioned or audio-described movies in compliance with the proposed regulation are sufficiently burdensome as to place a small theater at financial risk, then such costs would-by definition-pose an "undue burden." Such a movie theater would then be entitled to provide alternate compliance measures for auxiliary aids or services (if any) that were affordable in light of its particular circumstances.
Taken together, the foregoing considerations demonstrate the Department's sensitivity to the potential economic (cost) impact of the proposed regulation on small theaters (such as Miniplexes and Single Screen Theaters) and-to the extent consistent with the ADA-mitigate potential compliance costs.
In addition, the Department considered multiple alternatives for this rulemaking with a focus on choosing the alternative that best balances the requirements of the ADA with the potential costs to small business movie theaters. Among those alternatives weighed most heavily for the proposed rule are the two discussed below.
Requiring only 50 percent of screens to have closed captioning and audio description. The Department considered a proposal limiting the requirement for closed captioning and audio description to only 50 percent of movie screens. This alternative was discussed in the July 26, 2010, ANPRM. The ADA requires places of public accommodation "to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, unless the entity can demonstrate that taking such steps would fundamentally alter the nature of the good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation being offered or would result in an undue burden." 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii). After considering public comment and additional research, the Department has determined that it is not possible for movie theaters to meet their ADA obligation to provide equally effective communication to patrons with hearing and vision disabilities unless they have the capacity to show the movies that are available with captions and audio description at all showings when those same movies are available to patrons without disabilities; to only require access to 50 percent of movies being shown would be inappropriate. Unless a movie theater showed every movie on two screens in comparable auditoriums at all times-one screen showing the captioned and audio-described version and the other showing the same movie without captions and audio description-the Department is concerned that a 50 percent requirement would regularly lead to the circumstance where a movie theater would have a captioned or audio described movie, but would have no screen available on which to show it because all the appropriately equipped auditoriums were otherwise in use.
The Department considered whether it would be possible for movie theaters to meet their effective communication obligations by switching movies into auditoriums equipped to show movies with closed captions and audio description when a patron with a hearing or vision disability needed those accessibility features. But, the Department's research indicated that the business agreements regarding movie exhibitions limit this type of flexibility. Movie theaters regularly negotiate with film distributors regarding which auditoriums in a theater with more than one screen will show which films. Generally, if a film is expected to be very popular, it will open in the largest auditorium or in several auditoriums within the same complex. As the popularity decreases, the film will be moved from larger auditoriums to smaller auditoriums and from multiple auditoriums to a single auditorium. The timing of such moves will vary from theater to theater and from film to film.
Those theaters that do have the flexibility to switch auditoriums upon request to provide closed captioning or audio description would have other added costs associated with changing the auditoriums for showings. Costs could include the additional employee time and resources needed to physically switch the movie from one auditorium to another, as well as potential lost ticket sales if a more popular movie is displaced into a much smaller theater that sells out faster. Additionally, switching auditoriums to allow use of captioning or audio description equipment may result in auditorium changes for other patrons after they had purchased tickets and are possibly already seated. This would result in an inconvenience to many patrons, including the possibility that the switch would result in a different viewing experience than expected when purchasing a ticket due to differing auditorium sizes and comfort levels.
The Department also believes that this alternative would carry a much higher litigation risk. Patrons with disabilities would not have any way of assessing whether the failure to show a particular movie with closed captions and audio description was because the theater was failing to comply with its obligations under the regulation to provide these auxiliary aids and services or because that particular movie was not available with closed captions or audio description. Whether a theater had the capacity to move a film to accommodate a patron with a disability and should have done so upon request, or whether the theater did everything to meet its obligations under the regulation, would become murky and create confusion that could result in an increased risk of litigation.
Finally, this alternative favors larger movie theaters and disadvantages single screen theaters, which are more likely to be small businesses. Under a 50 percent requirement, at least one auditorium at every theater must have closed captioning and audio description capabilities. Thus, single screen theaters would see no reduction in costs under this alternative.
As such, the Department has rejected this alternative due to concerns that requiring only 50 percent of screens to have closed captioning and audio description capabilities would not comply with the ADA itself, that this approach would require substantial changes to the movie theater business model, that the initial perceptions that this approach would have substantially lower total costs are actually misleading, and that this approach would not address in any meaningful way the concerns for small business single screen theaters.
Compliance by analog theaters required in two years. The Department considered providing theaters with analog screens two years after the rule's publication date to become compliant, as opposed to the six-month compliance date provided for digital screens. This delay was considered for analog movie screens because such a large number of theaters are in the midst of transitioning to digital cinema, that additional time might be necessary. In addition, the delayed compliance date would have allowed small theaters that remain analog more time to obtain the necessary resources to purchase the equipment to provide closed captioning and audio description. The 15-year, discounted costs for this alternative range from $189.4 million to $237.5 million under a 7 percent discount rate, which are higher than the total costs for the proposed rule.
Upon review of the higher cost burden for firms still using analog projection, and with consultation from the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy, and as previously discussed, the Department is considering two alternative options for theaters with analog screens: (1) a four-year compliance date for theaters with analog screens (Option 1); or (2) deferring application of the requirements to analog screens until a later date (Option 2). In making the decision, the Department also took into consideration the fact that those movie theaters that have not yet made the transition to digital systems are more likely to be small businesses than those movie theaters that are already exhibiting in digital format. The Department also considered publicly available information that movie studios are in the process of phasing out analog film, and it is anticipated that by 2015, studios will not be producing analog prints of first run films. On the basis of this information, it appears likely that movie theaters that rely on first-run films for revenue will either convert to digital or go out of business before the four-year compliance date (sometime in 2018 or 2019), and thus there will actually be many fewer analog theaters that will need to comply with the rule if the Department proceeds under Option 1. If the Department proceeds under Option 2, there will be fewer small business theaters affected by the rule, because it will only apply to small business digital theaters.
Question 21a: Significant Alternatives for Small Analog Theaters under the RFA
Is the four-year compliance date in Option1 reasonable for those screens that will remain analog? If not, why not? Should the Department adopt Option 2 and defer requiring theaters with analog screens to comply with the specific requirements of this rule? (See Questions 6 and 8).
Question 21b: Significant Alternatives for Small Digital Theaters under the RFA
Is the proposed six-month compliance date for digital screens a reasonable timeframe to comply with the rule? Is six months enough time to order, install, and gain familiarity with the necessary equipment; train staff so that they can meaningfully assist patrons; and meet the notice requirement of the proposed rule? If the proposed six-month date is not reasonable, what should the compliance date be and why? (See Question 7).
Question 21c: Other Significant Alternatives for Small Theaters under the RFA
The Department invites comment on ways to tailor this regulation to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on small businesses.[58]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftn58> For example: Should the Department have a different compliance schedule for digital or analog theaters that have annual receipts below a certain threshold? If so, what should the financial threshold be? (See Question 6). The Department is also interested in receiving comment and data on the use of the undue burden defense by small businesses.
C. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), 3 CFR, 2000 comp. at 206, requires executive branch agencies to consider whether a rule will have federalism implications. That is, the rulemaking agency must determine whether the rule is likely to have substantial direct effects on State and local governments, a substantial direct effect on the relationship between the Federal government and the States and localities, or a substantial direct effect on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the different levels of government. If an agency believes that a rule is likely to have federalism implications, it must consult with State and local elected officials about how to minimize or eliminate the effects. This proposed rule applies to public accommodations that exhibit movies for a fee that are covered by title III of the ADA. To the Department's knowledge there are no State or local codes that specifically address captioning and audio description. As a result, the Department has concluded that this proposed rule does not have federalism implications.
D. Plain Language Instructions
The Department makes every effort to promote clarity and transparency in its rulemaking. In any regulation, there is a tension between drafting language that is simple and straightforward and drafting language that gives full effect to issues of legal interpretation. The Department operates a toll-free ADA Information Line (800) 514-0301 (voice); (800) 514-0383 (TTY) that the public is welcome to call to obtain assistance in understanding anything in this proposed rule. If any commenter has suggestions for how the regulation could be written more clearly, please submit those suggestions by any one of the following methods, making sure to identify this rulemaking by RIN 1190-AA63:

 *   Federal eRulemaking website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web site's instructions for submitting comments. The Regulations.gov Docket ID is DOJ-CRT-126.
 *   Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885, Fairfax, VA 22031-0885.
 *   Overnight, courier, or hand delivery: Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1425 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 4039, Washington, D.C. 20005.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), agencies are prohibited from conducting or sponsoring a "collection of information" as defined by the PRA unless in advance the agency has obtained an OMB control number. 44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq. This proposed rule does not propose any new or revisions to existing collections of information covered by the PRA.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 4(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1503(2), excludes from coverage under that Act any proposed or final Federal regulation that "establishes or enforces any statutory rights that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, handicap, or disability." Accordingly, this rulemaking is not subject to the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
List of Subjects for 28 CFR Part 36
Administrative practice and procedure, Buildings and facilities, Business and industry, Civil rights, Individuals with disabilities, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
By the authority vested in me as Attorney General by law, including 28 U.S.C. 509 and 510, 5 U.S.C. 301, and section 306 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101-336 (42 U.S.C. 12186), and for the reasons set forth in Appendix A to 28 CFR part 36, chapter I of title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 36-NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND IN COMMERCIAL FACILITIES
Subpart A-General
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR part 36 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510; 42 U.S.C. 12186(b).
2. In § 36.303,
a. Redesignate paragraph (g) as paragraph (h); and
b. Add paragraph (g) to read as follows:
§ 36.303 Auxiliary aids and services.
* * * * *
(g) Movie Captioning and Audio Description.
(1) Definitions. For the purposes of this paragraph-
(i) Audio description means provision of a spoken narration of key visual elements of a visually delivered medium, including, but not limited to, actions, settings, facial expressions, costumes, and scene changes.
(ii) Closed movie captioning means the written text of the movie dialogue and other sounds or sound making (e.g. sound effects, music, and the character who is speaking). Closed movie captioning is available only to individuals who request it. Generally, it requires the use of an individual captioning device to deliver the captions to the patron.
(iii) Individual audio description listening device means the individual device that patrons may use at their seats to hear audio description.
(iv) Individual captioning device means the individual device that patrons may use at their seats to view the closed captions.
(v) Movie theatermeans a facility other than a drive-in theater that is used primarily for the purpose of showing movies to the public for a fee.
(vi) Open movie captioning means the provision of the written text of the movie dialogue and other sounds or sound making in an on-screen text format that is seen by everyone in the movie theater.
(2) Movie captioning. (i) A public accommodation that owns, leases, leases to, or operates a movie theater shall ensure that its auditoriums have the capability to exhibit movies with closed movie captions. In all cases where the movies it intends to exhibit are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with closed movie captions, the public accommodation shall ensure that it acquires the captioned version of that movie. Movie theaters must then exhibit such movies with closed movie captions available at all scheduled screenings of those movies.
(ii) Other technologies. Movie theaters may meet their obligation to provide captions to persons with disabilities through use of a different technology, such as open movie captioning, so long as the communication provided is as effective as that provided to movie patrons without disabilities. Open movie captioning at some or all showings of movies is never required as a means of compliance with this section, even if it is an undue burden for a theater to exhibit movies with closed movie captioning in an auditorium.
(iii) Provision of individual captioning devices. (A) Subject to the compliance dates in paragraph (g)(4), a public accommodation that owns, leases, leases to, or operates a movie theater shall provide individual captioning devices in accordance with the following Table. This requirement does not apply to movie theaters that elect to exhibit all movies at all times at that facility with open movie captioning.
Capacity of Seating in Movie Theater

Minimum Required Number of Individual Captioning Devices

100 or less

2

101 to 200

2 plus 1 per 50 seats over 100 seats or a fraction thereof

201 to 500

4 plus 1 per 50 seats over 200 seats or a fraction thereof

501 to 1000

10 plus 1 per 75 seats over 500 seats or a fraction thereof

1001 to 2000

18 plus 1 per 100 seats over 1000 seats or a fraction thereof

2001 and over

28 plus 1 per 200 seats over 2000 seats or a fraction thereof

(B) In order to provide effective communication, individual captioning devices must:
(1) Be adjustable so that the captions can be viewed as if they are on or near the movie screen;
(2) Be available to patrons in a timely manner;
(3) Provide clear, sharp images in order to ensure readability; and
(4) Be properly maintained and be easily usable by the patron.
(3) Audio description. (i) A public accommodation that owns, leases, leases to, or operates a movie theater shall ensure that its auditoriums have the capability to exhibit movies with audio description. In all cases where the movies it intends to exhibit are produced, distributed, or otherwise made available with audio description, the public accommodation shall ensure that it acquires the version with audio description. Movie theaters must then exhibit such movies with audio description available at all scheduled screenings.
(ii) Provision of individual audio-description listening devices. Subject to the compliance dates in paragraph (g)(4) of this section, a public accommodation that owns, leases, leases to, or operates a movie theater shall provide devices capable of transmitting audio description in accordance with one of the following:
(A) A movie theater shall provide at least one individual audio-description listening device per screen, except that no theater shall provide less than two devices.
(B) A movie theater may comply with this requirement by using receivers it already has available as assistive listening devices in accordance with the requirements in Table 219.3 of the 2010 Standards, if those receivers have a minimum of two channels available for sound transmission to patrons.
(4) Compliance date.
(i) Digital movie screens. If a movie theater (as defined in this paragraph) has auditoriums with digital movie screens, those auditoriums must comply with the requirements in paragraph (g) of this section six months from the publication date of this rule in final form in the Federal Register. Once an analog movie screen has converted to digital cinema, it must comply with paragraph (g) within 6 months.
(ii) Analog movie screens.
Option 1: If a movie theater (as defined in this paragraph) has auditoriums with analog movie screens, those auditoriums must comply with the requirements in paragraph (g) four years from the publication date of this rule in final form in the Federal Register.
Option 2: Application of the requirements of paragraph (g) is deferred for analog movie screens but may be addressed in future rulemaking.
(5) Notice. Subject to the compliance dates in paragraph (g)(4), movie theaters shall ensure that communications and advertisements intended to inform potential patrons of movie showings and times, that are provided by the theater through websites, posters, marquees, newspapers, telephone, and other forms of communications, shall provide information regarding the availability of captioning and audio description for each movie.
(6) Subject to the compliance dates in in paragraph (g)(4), movie theaters must ensure that there is at least one individual on location at each facility available to assist patrons seeking these services at all times when a captioned or audio-described movie is shown. Such assistance includes the ability to:
(i) Operate all captioning and audio description equipment;
(ii) Locate all necessary equipment that is stored and quickly activate the equipment and any other ancillary equipment or systems required for the use of the devices; and
(iii) Communicate effectively with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and blind or have low vision regarding the uses of, and potential problems with, the equipment for such captioning or audio description.
* * *
______________________ __________________________
Date Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Attorney General

________________________________
[1]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref1> Baseline 1 (only one screen already has the necessary equipment); Baseline 2 (all theaters of those companies affected by recent litigation/settlement agreements already have the necessary equipment); Baseline 3 (all digital theaters estimated by the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO) in 2013 as having captioning capabilities (53 percent) have done so independently of the proposed rule's requirements). See Initial RA for further details on Baseline estimations.
[2]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref2> Baseline 1 (only one screen already has the necessary equipment); Baseline 2 (all theaters of those companies affected by recent litigation/settlement agreements already have the necessary equipment); Baseline 3 (all digital theaters estimated by NATO in 2013 as having captioning capabilities (53 percent) have done so independently of the proposed rule's requirements). SeeInitial RA for further details on Baseline estimations.
[3]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref3> The Census defines difficulty seeing as "experiencing blindness or having difficulty seeing words or letters in ordinary newsprint even when normally wearing glasses or contact lenses." It defines difficulty hearing as"experiencing deafness or having difficulty hearing a normal conversation, even when wearing a hearing aid." See U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, P70-131, Americans with Disabilities: 2010 Household Economic Studies at 8 (2012), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
[4]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref4> In 2012, a little more than two thirds (68 percent) of the U.S. and Canadian population over two years old went to a movie at a movie theater at least once that year. See Motion Picture Association of America, Theatrical Market Statistics (2012), available from Movie Picture Association of America, http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2012-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-Report.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
[5]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref5> The size standard of $35.5 million can be found in U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes, available at http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014) .
[6]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref6> In the Department's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Movie Captioning and Video Description (2010 ANPRM), 75 FR 43467 (July 26, 2010), the Department used the term "video description." In response to comments received from this ANPRM, the Department now refers to this process as "audio description."
[7]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref7> In addition to the four movie theater chains listed above, according to data available from the National Association of Theater Owners, the other six movie theater chains rounding out the domestic top ten as of July 2010, were Cineplex, Rave Cinemas, Marcus Theaters, Hollywood Theaters, National Amusements Inc., and Harkins Theaters.
[8]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref8> The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is a trade association representing the six major producers and distributors of theatrical motion pictures, home entertainment, and television programs, including Paramount Pictures Corporation, Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Universal City Studios LLP, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
[9]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref9> An undue burden is one that results in significant difficulty or expense for the public accommodation. See 28 CFR 36.104.
[10]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref10>Congress gave the Attorney General the authority and responsibility to issue regulations to carry out the provisions of title III of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. 12186(b).
[11]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref11> In 1990, the only way to include open-captions in a movie was to create a separate print of the movie and then laser-etch, or "burn," the captions onto that separate print. Limited copies of the open-captioned print were made and these copies were distributed after the uncaptioned versions to some, but by no means all, movie theaters.
[12]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref12> As the district court noted in Ball v. AMC Entertainment, Inc., 246 F. Supp. 2d 17, 22 (D.D.C. 2003), "Congress explicitly anticipated the situation presented in this case [the development of technology to provide closed captioning of movies]. Therefore, the isolated statement that open captioning of films in movie theaters was not required in 1990 cannot be interpreted to mean that [movie theaters] cannot now be expected and required to provide closed captioning of films in their movie theaters."
[13]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref13> A consent decree was entered into on November 7, 2011, in which Harkins agreed to provide closed captioning and audio description at all 346 screens in its 25 movie theaters by January 15, 2013. See Consent Decree in Arizona v. Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc., 603 F.3d 666 (9th Cir. 2010), ECF 131, CV07-703 PHX ROS, Approved 11/07/2011. In February 2012, Harkins announced that it expected to have all of its theaters equipped with closed captioning and audio description by the end of 2012. Press Release, Arizona Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, "Harkins Theatres announces closed captioning and descriptive narration devices" (Feb. 16, 2012), available at http://www.acdhh.org/news/harkins-theatres-announces-closed-captioning-and-descriptive-narration-devices(last visited July 14, 2014).
[14]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref14> The percentage of Americans approaching middle age or older is increasing. The 2010 Census found that during the decade spanning 2000 to 2010, the percentage of adults aged 45 to 64 years increased by 31.5 percent while the population aged 65 and over grew at a rate of 15.1 percent. By contrast, the population of adults between 18 and 44 grew by only 0.6 percent. U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, C2010BR-03, Age and Sex Composition in the United States: 2010 Census Brief 2 (2011), available at www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
[15]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref15> "While many people tend to think that the only factor in hearing loss is loudness, there are actually two factors involved: loudness and clarity. Loss generally occurs first in the high pitch, quiet range. A mild loss can cause one to miss 25-40% of speech, depending on the noise level of the surroundings and distance from the speaker. When there is background noise, it becomes difficult to hear well; speech may be audible but may not be understandable." Hearing Loss Association of Oregon, Facing the Challenge: A Survivor's Manual for Hard of Hearing People (revised 4th ed. Spring 2011), at 8, available at http://www.hearinglossor.org/survivor_manual.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014). The degrees of hearing loss include: 1) Mild (25 to 40 dB): Faint or distant speech may be difficult; lip reading can be helpful; 2) Moderate (41 to 55 dB): Conversational speech can be understood at a distance of three to five feet; as much as 50% of discussions may be missed if the voices are faint or not in line of vision; 3) Moderately Severe (56 to 70 dB): Speech must be loud in order to be understood; group discussions will be difficult to follow; 4) Severe (71 to 90 dB): Voices may be heard from a distance of about 1 foot from the ear; and 5) Profound (more than 91dB): Loud sounds may be heard, but vibrations will be felt more than tones heard; vision rather than hearing, is the primary avenue for communication. Id.
[16]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref16> See, e.g., Press Release, Illinois Attorney General, "Madigan Announces Settlement with AMC Theatres" (Apr. 4, 2012) available at http://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/pressroom/2012_04/20120404.html(last visited July 14, 2014) (settlement providing for provision of captioning and audio technology in all AMC theaters in the state of Illinois); Wash. State Commc'n Access Project v. Regal Cinemas, Inc., 290 P.3d 331 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012) (upholding trial court decision under Washington Law Against Discrimination requiring six theater chains to provide captions in the screening of movies in order to accommodate persons who are deaf or hard of hearing.); Arizona v. Harkins Amusement Enters., Inc., 603 F.3d 666, 675 (9th Cir. 2010) (settlement agreement filed 11/07/2011 CV07-703 PHX ROS); Complaint, Ass'n of Late-Deafened Adults v. Cinemark Holdings, Inc., No. 10548765 (Cal. App. Dep't Super. Ct. filed Nov. 30, 2010) (complaint relating to settlement requiring Cinemark to provide closed captions in all its California theaters); Press Release, Cinemark Holdings, Inc., Cinemark and ALDA Announce Greater Movie Theatre Accessibility for Customers who are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (April 26, 2011), available at http://www.cinemark.com/pressreleasedetail.aspx?node_id=22850(last visited July 14, 2014).
[17]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref17> For example, it is the Department's understanding that persons who live in communities served only by smaller regional movie theater chains are far less likely to have access to captioned and audio-described movies than individuals with disabilities who live in California, Arizona, or any of the major cities with theaters operated by Regal, Cinemark, or AMC. The Department bases this belief on its review of the information provided by Captionfish, which is a nationwide search engine that monitors which theaters offer both closed and open captions and audio description, and updates its Web site regularly. SeeFrequently Asked Questions, http://www.captionfish.com/faq (last visited July 14, 2014).
[18]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref18> The Department issued four ANPRMs on July 26, 2010, and invited testimony on all four ANPRMs at each public hearing. See 75 FR 66054 (Oct. 27, 2010).
[19]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref19> The Department is not endorsing any product or company named in this NPRM. The Department is identifying particular companies and products to enable it to provide an understandable and comprehensive discussion of the issues, products, and available technology for captioning and audio description of movies.
[20]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref20> Digital sound systems operate independently from analog projectors, which deliver the visual portion of a movie. To exhibit closed captioning and audio description with analog movies, a movie theater needs a digital sound system. Many movie theaters that exhibit analog movies have these systems. Digital sound systems are different from digital cinema, i.e., a movie theater does not need digital cinema to use digital sound.
[21]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref21> The WGBH National Center for Accessible Media is a nonprofit that developed MoPix®systems funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of Education.
[22]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref22> Because digital movies can be provided to movie theaters easily and inexpensively compared to the costs inherent in mailing several large reels of film per analog movie, the cost to distribute digital movies is significantly less for movie studios.
[23]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref23> "Closed caption technology for digital cinema has rapidly moved forward with the successful standardization of SMPTE 430-10 and 430-11 for the SMPTE CSP/RPL closed caption protocol, an Ethernet-based protocol designed for connecting closed caption systems with digital cinema servers. The SMPTE CSP/RPL communication protocol is license-free. The wide-spread use of this protocol has allowed multiple closed caption systems to proliferate." Michael Karagosian, Update on Digital Cinema Support for Those with Disabilities: April 2013, available at http://www.mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/misc/disabilities_update.php(last visited July 14, 2014).
[24]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref24> As with all closed-captioning systems available with today's technology, MoPix® also requires use of an individual captioning device by the patron seated in the theater auditorium.
[25]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref25> Analog movies support between two and eight channels, depending upon the audio sound format being used by the movie theater. See Michael Karagosian, Accessibility in the Cinema, (June 3, 2010), available at http://www.mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/presentations/2010-June_CHHA_Karagosian.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
[26]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref26>Wide-releases include all films except for those with limited release, documentaries, and similar titles.
[27]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref27> This commitment was possible because the interested parties reached agreement upon, and published standards for, SMPTE digital cinema packages.
[28]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref28>Representatives from the Independent Film & Television Alliance and from independent studios did not submit comments in response to the 2010 ANPRM.
[29]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref29> Some commenters to the 2010 ANPRM recommended that the Department delay proposing any new rule for at least 24 months as the digital transition continues to progress and new technologies become more widespread. It is already more than 3 years since the ANPRM was published, and the Department declines to delay this rulemaking any further.
[30]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref30> A requirement that all movies available with closed captioning be exhibited with closed captioning at all times eliminates other problems inherent in any partial requirement (be it 50 percent of screens in a facility, 50 percent of screens owned by a particular movie theater, number of movies being screened in a particular theater facility, etc.) because of issues involving availability of products with captioning and audio description and how movie theaters use auditoriums. Movie theaters negotiate with film distributors regarding which auditoriums in a multiplex theater will show which films. Generally, if a film is expected to be very popular, it will open in the largest auditorium or in several auditoriums within the same complex. As the popularity decreases, the film will be moved from larger auditoriums to smaller auditoriums and from multiple auditoriums to single auditoriums. The timing of such moves will vary from theater to theater and from film to film. Movies also can be rotated between screens throughout the day and evening. The Department's proposal to require 100 percent of screens to meet the requirement ensures that if movies are available with closed captioning, they will be exhibited with closed captioning, thereby maximizing options and choices for patrons with disabilities for all movies, at all times, throughout the country, and eliminates the confusion and lack of access that a partial requirement would create.
[31]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref31>Existing § 36.303(g) states that "[i]f provision of a particular auxiliary aid or service by a public accommodation would result * * * in an undue burden * * * the public accommodation shall provide an alternative auxiliary aid or service, if one exists, that would not result in * * * such a burden but would nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, individuals with disabilities receive the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations offered by the public accommodation."
[32]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref32> Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Regulatory Flexibility, Small Business, and Job Creation, 76 FR 3827 (Jan. 18, 2011).
[33]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref33> A number of commenters advocated for the Department to require open captioning exclusively, arguing that it is much more effective and cheaper than closed captioning.
[34]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref34> "Open captioning * * * of feature films playing in movie theaters, is not required by this legislation. Filmmakers are, however, encouraged to produce and distribute open-captioned versions of films, and theaters are encouraged to have at least some pre-announced screenings of a captioned version of feature films." H.R. Rep. No. 101-485, pt. 2, at 108 (1990); S. Rep. No. 101-116, at 64 (1989).
[35]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref35> With open movie captioning, there is no need for additional equipment to display the captions and, therefore, there is no additional cost to the theaters. For digital cinema, the movie theater simply selects the open caption option from its digital menu and the open captions appear on the movie screen for that showing only. For analog films, the movie theater would order the version with open movie captions, if available, and just display the movie without need for any additional equipment.
[36]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref36> 28 CFR § 36.104 (title III) (defining the "2010 Standards" as the requirements set forth in appendices B and D to 36 CFR part 1191 and the requirements contained in subpart D of 28 CFR part 36). The 2010 Standards can be found at http://www.ada.gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htm(last visited July 14, 2014).
[37]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref37> When the Department adopted standards for physical accessibility in public accommodations, the Department similarly did not base its scoping on how many persons with disabilities accessed inaccessible facilities.
[38]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref38> If a movie theater adopts an all-reserved seating policy, it would be advisable to hold back certain seats for individuals who need captioning (or audio description) if the captioning (or audio description) does not work well throughout the auditorium or works better in specific areas of the auditorium.
[39]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref39> The three baselines described in this section use the term "captioning enabled." This term refers to the extent to which movie theaters and movie screens currently have the hardware and captioning devices needed to comply with this NPRM. Each baseline includes assumptions for what this term means, and those assumptions can be found in the initial regulatory impact analysis that accompanies this NPRM.
[40]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref40>Annualized costs were calculated in a Microsoft Excel model using the PMT function (-PMT(discount rate, years of analysis, present value of total costs)).
[41]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref41> Unless a dollar figure in the text or the tables specifically identifies a particular baseline, the default baseline for general dollar figures uses Baseline 1.
[42]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref42> The Department's analysis assumes that at the time this rule takes effect, theaters will either be exclusively digital or exclusively analog (that is, all of the screens in a theater will be either digital or analog).
[43]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref43> The Census defines "[d]ifficulty seeing" as "experiencing blindness or having difficulty seeing words and letters in ordinary newsprint, even when wearing glasses or contact lenses (if normally worn)." U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, P70-131, Americans with Disabilities: 2010 Household Economic Studies at 8 (2012), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014). It defines "[d]ifficulty hearing" as"experiencing deafness or having difficulty hearing a normal conversation, even when wearing a hearing aid." Id.
[44]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref44> In 2012, a little more than two thirds (68 percent) of the U.S. and Canadian population over two years old went to a movie at a movie theater at least once that year. See Motion Picture Association of America, Theatrical Market Statistics at 11 (2012), available at http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2012-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-Report.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
[45]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref45> The size standard of $35.5 million can be found in U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes at 28, available at http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf(last visited July 14, 2014).
[46]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref46> Proposed § 36.303(g)(2)(ii) states that "[m]ovie theaters may meet their obligation to provide captions to persons with disabilities through use of a different technology, such as open movie captioning, so long as the communication provided is as effective as that provided to movie patrons without disabilities." This provision will allow theaters the option to choose newer and more cost effective technologies to provide effective communication to movie patrons, if such technologies are developed in the future.
[47]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref47> The size standard of $35.5 million can be found in U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes at 28, available at http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf (last visited July 14, 2014).
[48]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref48> Data taken from Excel file "static_us" downloaded from SBA Web site for "Firm Size Data," available at http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/849/12162 (last visited July 14, 2014). Calculations were also performed using a dataset from the Census Bureau's American FactFinder. See http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml(last visited July 14, 2014). Both datasets are derived from the 2007 Economic Census, but differ slightly.
[49]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref49> See 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
[50]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref50> The Small Business Size Regulations can be found at 13 CFR part 121.
[51]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref51> This estimate of costs for small businesses assumes that the Department would proceed under Option 1 (four-year compliance date for analog screens). If the Department decides to adopt Option 2 for the final rule and defer application of the requirements of the rule for analog screens, the costs for small businesses will be significantly less because the rule will only apply to small business digital theaters.
[52]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref52> The distribution is slightly different using the dataset from American FactFinder: For firms with revenue $499,999 and under, 100 percent were assumed to be Single Screen; for those with revenue $500,000-$4,999,999, 7 percent were Single Screens and 93 percent Miniplexes; for those with revenue $25,000,000 to $35,5000,000, 79 percent were Miniplexes and 21 percent Multiplexes.
[53]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref53> The hardware required for Rear Window technology includes a LED display necessary to show captions in each analog projection auditorium, a Datasat/DTS XD20 interface, and individual Reflectors that are used by patrons. The cost for the LED display ranges from $2,850 to $3,975, depending on whether it is a 2- or 3-line display (a 2-line display is recommended); the LED display cost used in Regulatory Analysis is an average of the cost of the two sizes of display. The Datasat/DTS XD20 interface, which is an interface connecting the Rear Window LED display to the theater system, costs about $4,200 per auditorium. The only device for individual use is the Rear Window Reflector, which fits into cup holders and costs $95 each. (Note: all these prices are taken from the "Rear Window® Captioning (RWC) Components Cost Overview" released by Median Access Group at WGBH August 2010, and adjusted for the fact that licensing fees are no longer required.) For audio description, the Williams Sound Audio System is compatible with analog captioning systems and was used to estimate video description equipment costs for analog systems. The Williams Sound Audio System requires an audio transmitter for each auditorium, which costs $467. Patrons may use a receiver and a headset, which cost $88 and $18, respectively.
[54]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref54> Note that in the main Initial RA, all of the Megaplexes and Multiplexes are assumed to have converted to digital projection. This assumption was made because NATO had estimated at a Congressional hearing in May 2013 that 88 percent of screens in the nation now have digital projection, making it very unlikely that any large theater complex remains analog. If any Megaplexes and/or Multiplexes stayed with analog projection, their average costs for purchasing analog closed captioning and audio description equipment would be $141,578 and $87,206, respectively.
[55]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref55> See id. app. I: Operations and Maintenance, for more information on standard operations and maintenance costs, and the sources from which those were derived.
[56]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref56> See the Initial RA, Section 7 for the Sensitivity Analysis with two alternative rates-5 percent and 8 percent-for calculating operations and maintenance costs.
[57]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref57> While the number of public comments received in response to the 2010 ANPRM was extraordinary, there were relatively few comments that specifically addressed the impact of captioning requirements on small theaters. No comments were received from representatives of independent movie theaters or from individual small (indoor) movie theater operators other than representatives of drive-in theaters (which are not covered by this rule). The referenced comment from the movie theater trade association is the only comment by representatives of the theatrical or movie exhibition industry to address the potential impact of the captioning regulation on small theaters affected by this rule.
[58]<http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/movie_nprm.html#_ftnref58> SeeMemorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Regulatory Flexibility, Small Business, and Job Creation, 76 FR 3827 (Jan. 18, 2011).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 93941 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140725/b11f0c0e/attachment-0008.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.png
Type: image/png
Size: 89510 bytes
Desc: image006.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140725/b11f0c0e/attachment-0009.png>

From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Fri Jul 25 21:24:50 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:24:50 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice
In-Reply-To: <a996f1d022da47b9a79b47e448ad14fd@BN1PR07MB310.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CB04FF60A875CE44A6688979D1B4F000035A3D4FBA@GSD-MBX-RDC06.gsd.doj.gov>
	<5A114E4DF190414C9DEC8CF5D78729BD0BD88E0574@GSD-MBX-RDC06.gsd.doj.gov>
	<98A98D365DA17347B0FA3158D79B489447BCC9D2@DPRC-EXCH-P07.JCONMAIL.doj.gov>
	<a996f1d022da47b9a79b47e448ad14fd@BN1PR07MB310.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C297270C@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>



From: Jobs [mailto:jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Maurer, Patricia via Jobs
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 8:34 AM
To: jobs at nfbnet.org
Subject: [Jobs] FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice



From: Hunter, Sue (JMD) [mailto:Sue.Hunter at usdoj.gov]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 11:01 AM
To: Hunter, Sue (JMD)
Subject: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice

Below is a list of current attorney vacancies at the United States Department of Justice. We encourage all interested applicants to apply;

To learn more about Justice and our legal careers, please visit our website: www.justice.gov/careers/legal/<http://www.justice.gov/careers/legal/>.
In addition, every year over 1,800 volunteer legal interns serve in DOJ components and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices throughout the country. If you know any law students who may be interested in a DOJ volunteer internship, please encourage them to review the many opportunities featured at www.justice.gov/careers/legal/volunteer-intern.html<http://www.justice.gov/careers/legal/volunteer-intern.html>.
Finally, please share this email with interested colleagues and peers. If you wish to update the contact information for you or the organization you represent, or no longer wish to receive these periodic email announcements, please respond to this email address and ask to be removed from our mailing list. Thank you.


USAO Eastern District of California

AUSA<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/ausa-16>

CA

07/23/2014

Civil Division (CIV)

Trial Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/trial-attorney-11>

DC

07/23/2014

USAO Northern District of Oklahoma

Assistant United States Attorney (Civil)<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-united-states-attorney-civil-1>

OK

07/22/2014

USAO Northern District of Iowa

Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-united-states-attorney-33>

IA

07/21/2014

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

Attorney Advisor (Internal Affairs Division Counsel)<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/attorney-advisor-internal-affairs-division-counsel>

VA

07/18/2014

Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD)

Trial Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/trial-attorney-10>

DC

07/18/2014

USAO Eastern District of California

AUSA<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/ausa-15>

CA

07/18/2014

USAO Northern District of Alabama

Uncompensated Special Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/uncompensated-special-assistant-united-states-attorney>

AL

07/17/2014

United States Attorney's Office (USAO)

AUSA<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/ausa-13>

07/17/2014

USAO Northern District of Alabama

Compensated Special Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/compensated-special-assistant-united-states-attorney>

AL

07/17/2014

USAO District of Arizona

Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/ausa-11>

AZ

07/15/2014

Criminal Division (CRM)

Resident Legal Advisor<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/resident-legal-advisor-0>

07/14/2014

Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)

Attorney Advisor<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/attorney-advisor-6>

GA

07/14/2014

Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA)

Attorney Advisor (Assistant General Counsel)<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/general-counsels-office>

DC

07/14/2014

Criminal Division (CRM)

Trial Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/trial-attorney-9>

VA

07/14/2014

Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA)

Special Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/special-assistant-united-states-attorney-0>

CA

07/14/2014

Antitrust Division (ATR)

Attorney Advisor<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/attorney-advisor-5>

DC

07/14/2014

Criminal Division (CRM)

Resident Legal Advisor<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/resident-legal-advisor>

07/11/2014

United States Trustee Program (USTP)

Trial Attorney (Bankruptcy)<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/trial-attorney-bankruptcy-0>

CA

07/10/2014

United States Trustee Program (USTP)

Trial Attorney (Bankruptcy)<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/trial-attorney-bankruptcy>

WA

07/10/2014

Office of Tribal Justice (OTJ)

Attorney Advisor<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/attorney-advisor-4>

DC

07/09/2014

United States Trustee Program (USTP)

Trial Attorney (General and Administrative Law)<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/trial-attorney-general-and-administrative-law>

DC

07/09/2014

USAO Southern District of Florida

Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-united-states-attorney-32>

FL

07/08/2014

USAO Southern District of Florida

Assistant United States Attorney<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-united-states-attorney-31>

FL

07/07/2014

Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD)

Assistant Section Chief<http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-section-chief>

DC

07/03/2014


-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Jobs mailing list
Jobs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/jobs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Jobs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/jobs_nfbnet.org/noel.nightingale%40ed.gov

From awildheir at gmail.com  Sat Jul 26 13:05:20 2014
From: awildheir at gmail.com (Aimee Harwood)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 09:05:20 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Feds Propose Rule for Captioning Services at the Movies
	- WRCBtv.com | Chattanooga News, Weather & Sports
Message-ID: <04D429ED-077F-441E-9294-8537BFB23D8B@gmail.com>

If we aren't involved in this, let's find a way to help it become a reality.

http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/26114397/feds-propose-rule-for-captioning-services-at-the-movies

Aimee

Sent from my iPhone

From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Mon Jul 28 15:54:44 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:54:44 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Inside Higher Ed article on recent court cases
	involving medical students with disabilities
In-Reply-To: <1BEA24B3B5F78E4C845D69EEDD9A27BDE30B2A9923@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <1BEA24B3B5F78E4C845D69EEDD9A27BDE30B2A9923@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C29727D0@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/07/28/judge-orders-medical-college-accommodate-deaf-student#sthash.NZc2b95o.dpbs
Fighting Their Way Into Medical School
July 28, 2014
By
Jake New<http://www.insidehighered.com/users/jake-new>
A student whose admission to Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences was revoked because he was deaf will start classes this fall, a federal judge ordered Tuesday.
The student, Zachary Featherstone, was accepted into the university's College of Osteopathic Medicine in the spring of 2013, and began working with the university to figure out the logistics of his accommodation requests, according to emails obtained by Inside Higher Ed. The State of Washington Division of Vocational Rehabilitation agreed to cover the costs of his captioning and interpreting services if PNWU could not.
Saying that it needed more preparation time to prepare the accommodations, the university deferred Featherstone's admission for a year. Then the university withdrew his acceptance altogether.
"Based on our conclusion that your education and that of your classmates will be compromised; that we cannot provide an equivalent education, particularly in clinical environments; and that risks to patient safety would be increased, we cannot support your matriculation," Thomas Scandalis, the college's dean, wrote in a letter to Featherstone in April 2014.
In his preliminary injunction, U.S. District Judge Salvador Mendoza called the concerns "unfounded" and "wholly speculative," but medical colleges have made the argument for decades. Evolving technology and recent court rulings - three of them just in the last year - are starting to chip away at the legality of their reasoning.
Last month, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that Palmer College of Chiropractic violated the rights of a blind student<http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/06/30/iowa-supreme-court-says-chiropractic-college-discriminated-against-blind-student#sthash.J1XuRrSV.dpbs> by denying him the use of a sighted reader to describe X-rays to him. In December, after four years of legal battles, a hearing-impaired student won a court order forcing Creighton University's medical school<http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/12/23/us-judge-orders-creighton-medical-school-provide-specific-services-deaf-student#sthash.oI00Ok9F.dpbs> to provide him with accommodations. Creighton is appealing the decision.
In Featherstone's case, the university said its primary concern was one of patient safety. In the "rapid-response environments" of emergency departments and intensive care units - required rotations for most medical students - verbal communication is critical, Scandalis wrote in his letter. Translating verbal cues into visual ones, the university argued, would result in a loss of precious time and endanger patients' lives.
"In general, it's common in academia for concerns and issues to come up when looking at accommodations," Stephen Shannon, the president of the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, said. "But in medical schools it's a more complex issue. There's federal laws, state laws, the professional standards around the education itself. And then there's the responsibility to the patient."
The American Association of Medical Colleges declined to comment for this article, but its guidelines released in 2005<https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Medical%20Students%20with%20Disabilities%20A%20Generation%202005.pdf>tell medical colleges that they are not required to waive any essential elements of a program - such as a surgery rotation - to accommodate students with disabilities, as it would fundamentally alter the requirements of the degree. On that point, courts have tended to so far side with the institutions. The parameters for denying a student admission based on safety concerns, however, are far more narrow.
According to the AAMC, the institution must demonstrate that the disabled student poses a direct threat that "cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures."
In a case that made it to the Supreme Court in 1979<http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/442/397>, a prospective nursing student was denied admission at Southeastern Community College because of her hearing impairment. Though the woman could lip read, the college said it was concerned about the safety of patients in situations where she and her colleagues would have their mouths covered by surgical masks.
The court sided with Southeastern, but it included a forward-looking caveat in its decision. While the limited technology in 1979 made Southeastern's argument a reasonable one, Justice Lewis Powell wrote in the court's opinion, there would come a time when that was no longer the case.
"Technological advances can be expected to enhance opportunities to rehabilitate the handicapped or otherwise to qualify them for some useful employment," Powell wrote. "Such advances also may enable attainment of these goals without imposing undue financial and administrative burdens upon a State. Thus, situations may arise where a refusal to modify an existing program might become unreasonable and discriminatory."
L. Scott Lissner, Americans With Disabilities Act coordinator at Ohio State University and former president of the Association on Higher Education and Disability, said those technological advances have now taken place for many disabilities.
"I think captioning technology, for example, has vastly improved." Lissner said. "It wasn't even on the list of considerations of the 1979 case. It just wasn't a practical tool at that point in time. In many of these cases, the accommodations are now affordable and reasonable. But there are misconceptions that still exist. Historically, doctors don't like 'sick' doctors. They think, 'That's for the patients. That's not for us.' "
A study published in the journal Academic Medicine<http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Abstract/2013/02000/Deafness_Among_Physicians_and_Trainees___A.27.aspx> in 2013 found that technology is allowing a growing number of deaf students, in particular, to participate and succeed in medical school. When it comes to setting up those accommodations, however, many of the students said they were on their own. Most students spend two hours per week arranging accommodations, according to the survey, with a handful even saying they spend as much as ten hours on the task every week.
It may take extra effort and planning, but hearing impaired medical students now have access to an array of technology including amplified stethoscopes, advanced text-to-speech technology, and amplified telephones. In 2011, a deaf medical student at the University of California at Davis completed her surgery rotation<http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/medschool/features/2011-2012/01/20111207_som_deaf_student.html> by using a tablet to send the sounds of an operating room to an off-site transcriber. The transcriber then turned the audio into typed messages that appeared on an overhead monitor back in the operating room.
For blind students, there are visual describers, raised line drawings, and devices that translate flat images into a series of vibrating pins that can be felt with a student's fingers. A blind student used those technologies to help him graduate from the University of Wisconsin's medical school in 2005<http://onwisconsin.uwalumni.com/features/seeing-potential/>.
"I think we've absolutely reached that time where colleges can't make this excuse anymore," Kyle Shachmut, president of National Federation of the Blind of Massachusetts, said. "The students know that with the right technology and good, high expectations that they can do this. But I think college administrators' thinking and low expectations haven't caught up with the reality and abilities students now have."
And the anxiety concerning patient safety continues to persist - even outside medical colleges.
"What is next?" the dissent in the Iowa Supreme Court decision asked. "Are we going to require the Federal Aviation Administration to hire blind air traffic controllers, relying on assistants to tell them what is appearing on the screen?


From b75205 at gmail.com  Mon Jul 28 17:57:03 2014
From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper)
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:57:03 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] blindlaw Digest, Vol 122, Issue 24
In-Reply-To: <mailman.34.1406462402.20826.blindlaw_nfbnet.org@nfbnet.org>
References: <mailman.34.1406462402.20826.blindlaw_nfbnet.org@nfbnet.org>
Message-ID: <CADmQu+6y8m-HP8ECTmVWTcekxwDTGJ19_VYpPanagdKdGLgmXw@mail.gmail.com>

Long playing video with closed captioning has technical problems that have
to be overcome.  Sure you can close caption a small video on YouTube
something less than 5 minutes and it will match up to the words, but long
playing closed captioning doesn't sync with the video and so you have a
technical problem.

i worked on closed captioning several videos, film documentaries of more
than 30 minutes each and I found that the sync times depended on what type
of encoding was used for the films.  That even though it appeared that the
videos were exactly the same, they came from the same original file, they
were slightly off and the times for the compressed videos we posted on
YouTube, did not match the times for the videos we placed on Blue Ray.  And
as you progressed through the video, the time syncing went farther and
farther off.

This is not like subtitles, which are directly embedded in the film and
which I think is a better idea with movie theatre films, closed captioning
is a separate file and so syncing the video becomes very important.  You do
not want the punch line to be disclosed before it is said on the screen.

The movie industry is going to be able to say that for technical reasons
this is not going to be as easy as everyone thinks it will be and I would
suggest that if you push too hard you may end up with a situation we have
now with DAISY where it seemed like a great idea but nobody could implement
it consistently.

Google is doing the best work in closed captioning, they have a vested
interest in making this work.

James Pepper


On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:00 AM, <blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> Send blindlaw mailing list submissions to
>         blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of blindlaw digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Feds Propose Rule for Captioning Services at the Movies   -
>       WRCBtv.com | Chattanooga News, Weather & Sports (Aimee Harwood)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 09:05:20 -0400
> From: Aimee Harwood <awildheir at gmail.com>
> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: [blindlaw] Feds Propose Rule for Captioning Services at the
>         Movies  - WRCBtv.com | Chattanooga News, Weather & Sports
> Message-ID: <04D429ED-077F-441E-9294-8537BFB23D8B at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> If we aren't involved in this, let's find a way to help it become a
> reality.
>
>
> http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/26114397/feds-propose-rule-for-captioning-services-at-the-movies
>
> Aimee
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of blindlaw Digest, Vol 122, Issue 24
> *****************************************
>

From James.T.Fetter.3 at nd.edu  Tue Jul 29 15:42:43 2014
From: James.T.Fetter.3 at nd.edu (James Fetter)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 11:42:43 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <008a01cfa7aa$ba7eba20$2f7c2e60$@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<007501cfa7a8$99c543a0$cd4fcae0$@gmail.com>
	<CAAyF1PAcBpsA65pj5HeAq2fz8eCRBgXPO6n=Go0fH6OaW=Q-_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<008a01cfa7aa$ba7eba20$2f7c2e60$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+ffSpgyM1BOWON4sWzat092WcBZD96Y1e9m2=cg+BJ=rbgYAg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,
I hope this finds you all well. By way of introduction, I am currently
a postdoctoral fellow in Political Science at Notre Dame, and I am
planning to make the transition from academia to the legal profession
in the very near future by attending law school in the fall of next
year. I am thus planning to take the LSAT in December, and because I
am totally blind, I am in the process of gathering all the information
I need to request accommodations. The questions I have about this
process may all be answered in the upcoming conference call on the
LSAT, but the primary problem I'm running into right now is obtaining
documentation of past accommodations for standardized tests I took in
high school and college (SAT, GRE, etc), especially since I graduated
from college back in 2005 and from high school in 2001. I have all of
my old score reports for these tests, but I only have accommodation
letters for one of them, since I did not know back in high school and
college that I would need all of this information to obtain future
accommodations. When requesting this information from the College
Board, the only option I was given was to order an archived score
report, which I don't think has any information on it regarding the
specific accommodations I received. As I recall, all the score reports
reflect is that the test was taken under nonstandard conditions. If
someone who has recently taken the LSAT and had to deal with the
College Board to get verification of past accommodations could help me
out here, I would greatly appreciate it. If necessary, I can wait
until the conference call to try dealing with the College Board again,
but I'm assuming that the LSAC requires accommodation requests to be
made several months before the anticipated test date. Please also feel
free to email me off list at jfetter at nd.edu. Thanks.
Sincerely,
James Fetter

On 7/24/14, Ronza Othman via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Based on the feedback and information we've received from the members of
> this list, we are hosting and organizing the call to incorporate the
> information you are seeking at the time and date you suggested (and adding
> an additional session that week for those who are unable to make the
> Saturday session).  Christopher, can you call me so that we can chat to
> make
> sure your personal ideas are incorporated as best as we can?  I'm at
> 708-829-0523.  Given that this is a global issue for our members, we
> decided
> that the NABL Board should coordinate this event - not trying to step on
> toes but rather give our members the forum you want within the organization
> rather than independent of it.  Afterall, we exist to provide resources for
> blind attorneys and law students.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ronza
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stewart, Christopher K [mailto:chris.stewart at uky.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:46 PM
> To: Ronza Othman
> Cc: Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
>
> The simple fact is there are real students in need of information sooner
> rather than later. Much as I appreciate the offer, I would still welcome
> anyone to contact me directly with regard to an August 9 call. I
> particularly urge anyone seeking to take the exam within the next testing
> cycle to call in and listen and contribute their experiences thus far.
>
> Moreover, the sooner there is a concise Fact Sheet or some other sort of
> guide for potential blind test takers, the better for everyone. If you
> would
> like to have a conference call later to amend what we've found, you should
> of course feel free. However, I can think of no reason not to act now
> particularly where accommodated testers must begin the process so early.
>
> Sincerely,
> Chris Stewart
>
>
>
> On 7/24/14, Ronza Othman <rothmanjd at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>> Actually, the National Association of Blind Lawyers has decided to
>> host this call.  You've got some great ideas, and we hope to meet the
>> needs of everyone on the list.  We have been working to launch a
>> quarterly conference call to discuss relevant issues in the
>> profession, and we've missed the last one.  We'll take care of
>> arranging the Conference Bridge and coordinating logistics.  In
>> addition, we've decided to do two sessions of this call since there's
>> such tremendous interest.  Details to follow in a separate email.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ronza
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>> Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw
>> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:12 PM
>> To: blindlaw
>> Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
>>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better
>> day for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that
>> people email me off list at chris.stewart at uky.edu with time questions
>> or confirmations of attendance. I will email everyone as a group
>> moving forward so that we don't flood this list with
>> conference-specific emails.
>>
>> I propose we discuss the following issues:
>>
>> 1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our
>> individual experiences and recommendations)
>>
>> 2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general
>> accessible
>> resources) A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille
>> users B. For those who use large print
>>
>> 3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the
>> struggle is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly
>> everyone
>> struggles?)
>>
>> 4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this
>> because everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd
>> at least like to get an overview of individual experiences.)
>>
>> I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I
>> have the conference call number and group number, and I'll send that
>> information out once we've set a definite time.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing from everyone.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Chris Stewart
>>
>>
>> --
>> Chris K. Stewart
>> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff
>> Editor, Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution
>> Society California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
>> Ph:
>> (502)457-1757
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmai
>> l.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff Editor,
> Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution Society California
> Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jfetter%40nd.edu
>


From dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu  Tue Jul 29 18:15:20 2014
From: dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu (Manners, Derek)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 14:15:20 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
In-Reply-To: <CA+ffSpgyM1BOWON4sWzat092WcBZD96Y1e9m2=cg+BJ=rbgYAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyF1PBQWFF8vpF6QMfPpWsrKFwrdJDJYkMG=eh4qFXOkvRwFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<007501cfa7a8$99c543a0$cd4fcae0$@gmail.com>
	<CAAyF1PAcBpsA65pj5HeAq2fz8eCRBgXPO6n=Go0fH6OaW=Q-_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<008a01cfa7aa$ba7eba20$2f7c2e60$@gmail.com>
	<CA+ffSpgyM1BOWON4sWzat092WcBZD96Y1e9m2=cg+BJ=rbgYAg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAP4LJphLCeZdYeNrVovS-6eC-my7mz3_eR5LHfh3r8kFbT_UQ@mail.gmail.com>

I had a similar issue.  What you have to do is talk to an actual person
from College Board and ask them for the documentation.  They should have it
on file unless it is too old.  If it is too old, you'll need to get a
letter from them stating that it is too old and just get all the
information you can or a letter from the source explaining that they don't
keep records that far back etc.  That was my experience getting ACT
accommodation verification.

Best
Derek


On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:42 AM, James Fetter via blindlaw <
blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> Dear all,
> I hope this finds you all well. By way of introduction, I am currently
> a postdoctoral fellow in Political Science at Notre Dame, and I am
> planning to make the transition from academia to the legal profession
> in the very near future by attending law school in the fall of next
> year. I am thus planning to take the LSAT in December, and because I
> am totally blind, I am in the process of gathering all the information
> I need to request accommodations. The questions I have about this
> process may all be answered in the upcoming conference call on the
> LSAT, but the primary problem I'm running into right now is obtaining
> documentation of past accommodations for standardized tests I took in
> high school and college (SAT, GRE, etc), especially since I graduated
> from college back in 2005 and from high school in 2001. I have all of
> my old score reports for these tests, but I only have accommodation
> letters for one of them, since I did not know back in high school and
> college that I would need all of this information to obtain future
> accommodations. When requesting this information from the College
> Board, the only option I was given was to order an archived score
> report, which I don't think has any information on it regarding the
> specific accommodations I received. As I recall, all the score reports
> reflect is that the test was taken under nonstandard conditions. If
> someone who has recently taken the LSAT and had to deal with the
> College Board to get verification of past accommodations could help me
> out here, I would greatly appreciate it. If necessary, I can wait
> until the conference call to try dealing with the College Board again,
> but I'm assuming that the LSAC requires accommodation requests to be
> made several months before the anticipated test date. Please also feel
> free to email me off list at jfetter at nd.edu. Thanks.
> Sincerely,
> James Fetter
>
> On 7/24/14, Ronza Othman via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> > Based on the feedback and information we've received from the members of
> > this list, we are hosting and organizing the call to incorporate the
> > information you are seeking at the time and date you suggested (and
> adding
> > an additional session that week for those who are unable to make the
> > Saturday session).  Christopher, can you call me so that we can chat to
> > make
> > sure your personal ideas are incorporated as best as we can?  I'm at
> > 708-829-0523.  Given that this is a global issue for our members, we
> > decided
> > that the NABL Board should coordinate this event - not trying to step on
> > toes but rather give our members the forum you want within the
> organization
> > rather than independent of it.  Afterall, we exist to provide resources
> for
> > blind attorneys and law students.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ronza
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stewart, Christopher K [mailto:chris.stewart at uky.edu]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:46 PM
> > To: Ronza Othman
> > Cc: Blind Law Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
> >
> > The simple fact is there are real students in need of information sooner
> > rather than later. Much as I appreciate the offer, I would still welcome
> > anyone to contact me directly with regard to an August 9 call. I
> > particularly urge anyone seeking to take the exam within the next testing
> > cycle to call in and listen and contribute their experiences thus far.
> >
> > Moreover, the sooner there is a concise Fact Sheet or some other sort of
> > guide for potential blind test takers, the better for everyone. If you
> > would
> > like to have a conference call later to amend what we've found, you
> should
> > of course feel free. However, I can think of no reason not to act now
> > particularly where accommodated testers must begin the process so early.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Chris Stewart
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/24/14, Ronza Othman <rothmanjd at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Chris,
> >> Actually, the National Association of Blind Lawyers has decided to
> >> host this call.  You've got some great ideas, and we hope to meet the
> >> needs of everyone on the list.  We have been working to launch a
> >> quarterly conference call to discuss relevant issues in the
> >> profession, and we've missed the last one.  We'll take care of
> >> arranging the Conference Bridge and coordinating logistics.  In
> >> addition, we've decided to do two sessions of this call since there's
> >> such tremendous interest.  Details to follow in a separate email.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ronza
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
> >> Stewart, Christopher K via blindlaw
> >> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:12 PM
> >> To: blindlaw
> >> Subject: [blindlaw] Update on LSAT Conference Call
> >>
> >> Hello All,
> >>
> >> Okay here's an update. I'm hearing that Saturday, August 9 is a better
> >> day for many people. I would like to suggest 1:00 PM. I would ask that
> >> people email me off list at chris.stewart at uky.edu with time questions
> >> or confirmations of attendance. I will email everyone as a group
> >> moving forward so that we don't flood this list with
> >> conference-specific emails.
> >>
> >> I propose we discuss the following issues:
> >>
> >> 1. General application procedures for accommodated testing (our
> >> individual experiences and recommendations)
> >>
> >> 2. Accommodated studying methods (from formal courses to general
> >> accessible
> >> resources) A. For those who are exclusively screenreader users/braille
> >> users B. For those who use large print
> >>
> >> 3. The logic section specifically (how did we cope? How much of the
> >> struggle is blindness-related? How much is the simple fact that nearly
> >> everyone
> >> struggles?)
> >>
> >> 4. State Voc Rehab. (I don't want to spend too much time on this
> >> because everything is so different from state to state. However, I'd
> >> at least like to get an overview of individual experiences.)
> >>
> >> I'm open to suggestion for additions or alterations to this list. I
> >> have the conference call number and group number, and I'll send that
> >> information out once we've set a definite time.
> >>
> >> I look forward to hearing from everyone.
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >> Chris Stewart
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Chris K. Stewart
> >> University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff
> >> Editor, Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution
> >> Society California Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> >> Ph:
> >> (502)457-1757
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> blindlaw mailing list
> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> blindlaw:
> >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmai
> >> l.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Chris K. Stewart
> > University of Kentucky College of Law, J.D. Candidate, 2016 Staff Editor,
> > Kentucky Law Journal Co-President, American Constitution Society
> California
> > Institute of the Arts, B.F.A. 2010
> > Ph:
> > (502)457-1757
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> > blindlaw:
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jfetter%40nd.edu
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.law.harvard.edu
>

From emrene at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 30 04:47:35 2014
From: emrene at earthlink.net (Elizabeth Rene)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 22:47:35 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] Newly appointed
Message-ID: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>

Hi listmates,

Just wanted to let you know that the Washington State Bar Association's Board of Governors this last weekend voted unanimously to appoint me to the WSBA Character and Fitness Board.  This is a three-year term.  As with most state bar associations, the Character and Fitness board conducts hearings and makes recommendations to the state supreme court regarding applicants for admission to the bar whose fitness to practice has come into question.  It also hears complaints regarding lawyers whose conduct violates the Rules of Professional Conduct and makes recommendations regarding their ongoing fitness to practice.

At the same meeting, the Board of Governors confirmed my appointment to the Court Rules and Procedures Committee, that has jurisdiction over everything but the rules governing the practice of law itself.

The Character and Fitness Board has input into the Admission to Practice Rules and the questions asked of bar exam applicants on their admission forms.  This is important because there has been a growing concern here in Washington and in other states regarding bar admission questions that challenge the character and fitness of applicants based on disability status alone, e.g. mental illness or the receipt of psychiatric treatment.

I raised the issue of the discriminatory impact of such questions to the BOG and stressed the importance of having someone on the board with an understanding and alertness to disability stigma, and they heard me.  They know that I want to see the definition of fitness changed and the application questions reworded to address conduct rather than diagnosis.

This board and committee work will be very demanding, physically and emotionally, and will be done in addition to my own lawyering job.  I'll need your support and encouragement as the months go by, even though the substance of what I do will be confidential. I hope I can count on you all.  Because, in some way, when one of us gets recognized like this, we all share in it.This is your victory too.

Best regards,

Elizabeth Rene

From jty727 at gmail.com  Wed Jul 30 12:53:01 2014
From: jty727 at gmail.com (Justin Young)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 08:53:01 -0400
Subject: [blindlaw] Newly appointed
In-Reply-To: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
References: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
Message-ID: <CA+3U9s7UJa8KnkszTdR1P2S7pNS_L8s_F_owbesnD4pAmt3d6Q@mail.gmail.com>

Congratulations of your appointments to both those boards/groups!

Justin

On 7/30/14, Elizabeth Rene via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Hi listmates,
>
> Just wanted to let you know that the Washington State Bar Association's
> Board of Governors this last weekend voted unanimously to appoint me to the
> WSBA Character and Fitness Board.  This is a three-year term.  As with most
> state bar associations, the Character and Fitness board conducts hearings
> and makes recommendations to the state supreme court regarding applicants
> for admission to the bar whose fitness to practice has come into question.
> It also hears complaints regarding lawyers whose conduct violates the Rules
> of Professional Conduct and makes recommendations regarding their ongoing
> fitness to practice.
>
> At the same meeting, the Board of Governors confirmed my appointment to the
> Court Rules and Procedures Committee, that has jurisdiction over everything
> but the rules governing the practice of law itself.
>
> The Character and Fitness Board has input into the Admission to Practice
> Rules and the questions asked of bar exam applicants on their admission
> forms.  This is important because there has been a growing concern here in
> Washington and in other states regarding bar admission questions that
> challenge the character and fitness of applicants based on disability status
> alone, e.g. mental illness or the receipt of psychiatric treatment.
>
> I raised the issue of the discriminatory impact of such questions to the BOG
> and stressed the importance of having someone on the board with an
> understanding and alertness to disability stigma, and they heard me.  They
> know that I want to see the definition of fitness changed and the
> application questions reworded to address conduct rather than diagnosis.
>
> This board and committee work will be very demanding, physically and
> emotionally, and will be done in addition to my own lawyering job.  I'll
> need your support and encouragement as the months go by, even though the
> substance of what I do will be confidential. I hope I can count on you all.
> Because, in some way, when one of us gets recognized like this, we all share
> in it.This is your victory too.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Elizabeth Rene
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jty727%40gmail.com
>


From chrisgriggs0 at gmail.com  Wed Jul 30 12:53:01 2014
From: chrisgriggs0 at gmail.com (Chris Griggs)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:53:01 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Newly appointed
In-Reply-To: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
References: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
Message-ID: <B54B838B-4347-4361-B66A-030AE186D6A0@gmail.com>

Congratulations

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 29, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Elizabeth Rene via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi listmates,
> 
> Just wanted to let you know that the Washington State Bar Association's Board of Governors this last weekend voted unanimously to appoint me to the WSBA Character and Fitness Board.  This is a three-year term.  As with most state bar associations, the Character and Fitness board conducts hearings and makes recommendations to the state supreme court regarding applicants for admission to the bar whose fitness to practice has come into question.  It also hears complaints regarding lawyers whose conduct violates the Rules of Professional Conduct and makes recommendations regarding their ongoing fitness to practice.
> 
> At the same meeting, the Board of Governors confirmed my appointment to the Court Rules and Procedures Committee, that has jurisdiction over everything but the rules governing the practice of law itself.
> 
> The Character and Fitness Board has input into the Admission to Practice Rules and the questions asked of bar exam applicants on their admission forms.  This is important because there has been a growing concern here in Washington and in other states regarding bar admission questions that challenge the character and fitness of applicants based on disability status alone, e.g. mental illness or the receipt of psychiatric treatment.
> 
> I raised the issue of the discriminatory impact of such questions to the BOG and stressed the importance of having someone on the board with an understanding and alertness to disability stigma, and they heard me.  They know that I want to see the definition of fitness changed and the application questions reworded to address conduct rather than diagnosis.
> 
> This board and committee work will be very demanding, physically and emotionally, and will be done in addition to my own lawyering job.  I'll need your support and encouragement as the months go by, even though the substance of what I do will be confidential. I hope I can count on you all.  Because, in some way, when one of us gets recognized like this, we all share in it.This is your victory too.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Elizabeth Rene
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/chrisgriggs0%40gmail.com


From darlene.olsen at gmail.com  Wed Jul 30 14:44:31 2014
From: darlene.olsen at gmail.com (Darlene Olsen)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:44:31 -0700
Subject: [blindlaw] Newly appointed
In-Reply-To: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
References: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
Message-ID: <CAJCurQ++Q=yTqmbNXS36TP_a4S3xdQfHgD2+RW8iWoM_4xDOvw@mail.gmail.com>

 Congrats to you!  You will do a fantastic job.
Best Regards,
Darlene Olsen in Benicia, California

On 7/29/14, Elizabeth Rene via blindlaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Hi listmates,
>
> Just wanted to let you know that the Washington State Bar Association's
> Board of Governors this last weekend voted unanimously to appoint me to the
> WSBA Character and Fitness Board.  This is a three-year term.  As with most
> state bar associations, the Character and Fitness board conducts hearings
> and makes recommendations to the state supreme court regarding applicants
> for admission to the bar whose fitness to practice has come into question.
> It also hears complaints regarding lawyers whose conduct violates the Rules
> of Professional Conduct and makes recommendations regarding their ongoing
> fitness to practice.
>
> At the same meeting, the Board of Governors confirmed my appointment to the
> Court Rules and Procedures Committee, that has jurisdiction over everything
> but the rules governing the practice of law itself.
>
> The Character and Fitness Board has input into the Admission to Practice
> Rules and the questions asked of bar exam applicants on their admission
> forms.  This is important because there has been a growing concern here in
> Washington and in other states regarding bar admission questions that
> challenge the character and fitness of applicants based on disability status
> alone, e.g. mental illness or the receipt of psychiatric treatment.
>
> I raised the issue of the discriminatory impact of such questions to the BOG
> and stressed the importance of having someone on the board with an
> understanding and alertness to disability stigma, and they heard me.  They
> know that I want to see the definition of fitness changed and the
> application questions reworded to address conduct rather than diagnosis.
>
> This board and committee work will be very demanding, physically and
> emotionally, and will be done in addition to my own lawyering job.  I'll
> need your support and encouragement as the months go by, even though the
> substance of what I do will be confidential. I hope I can count on you all.
> Because, in some way, when one of us gets recognized like this, we all share
> in it.This is your victory too.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Elizabeth Rene
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/darlene.olsen%40gmail.com
>


From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov  Wed Jul 30 15:19:51 2014
From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:19:51 -0500
Subject: [blindlaw] Supervisory General Attorney (Civil Rights), GS-905-15,
 Job Announcement Number: SEA-OCR-2014-0004
In-Reply-To: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A92FF702@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
References: <41370810CEBD1C4DA64C9361CE162341E6A92FF702@EDUPTCEXMB01.ed.gov>
Message-ID: <04F1893C93758F4AA7CB436BB26750660118C2A193A3@EDUPTCEXMB02.ed.gov>


Link:
https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/PrintPreview/376763600

Text:
[cid:image003.png at 01CFAB40.17D6BF40]
Job Title: Supervisory General Attorney (Civil Rights), GS-905-15
Department: Department Of Education
Agency: Office for Civil Rights
Job Announcement Number:SEA-OCR-2014-0004
SALARY RANGE:

$122,570.00 to $157,100.00 / Per Year

OPEN PERIOD:

Tuesday, July 29, 2014 to Tuesday, August 19, 2014

SERIES & GRADE:

GS-0905-15

POSITION INFORMATION:

Full-Time - Permanent

PROMOTION POTENTIAL:
15

DUTY LOCATIONS:

1 vacancy in the following location:
Seattle, WA

WHO MAY APPLY:

This announcement is open to all U.S. citizens.

SECURITY CLEARANCE:

Public Trust - Background Investigation

SUPERVISORY STATUS:

Yes

JOB SUMMARY:
About the Agency <https://jobs.mgsapps.monster.com/edu/vacancy/preview.hms?orgId=1&jnum=61803>
You will serve as Chief Attorney in the OCR Seattle, WA Office. As Chief Attorney, you will be responsible for providing leadership and guidance in the support of civil rights compliance and OCR's enforcement program, consistent with the mission of the Department and OCR's Strategic Plan. You will serve as the chief legal advisor in the regional office and have the primary responsibility for implementing the directives of the Office Director.
TRAVEL REQUIRED
*        Occasional Travel
*        Less than 10% of the time.
RELOCATION AUTHORIZED
*        No
KEY REQUIREMENTS
*        You must be a U.S. Citizen.
*        Some overnight travel is required.
*        Relocation expenses WILL NOT be paid.
________________________________
DUTIES:
The incumbent provides expert legal and policy advice to case resolution teams, the Office Director, the Program Manager, the Enforcement Director, the Deputy Assistant Secretary and the Assistant Secretary relating to the investigation, negotiation, and resolution of extremely complex cases and innovative proactive compliance reviews with national impact; acceptance and monitoring of the resolution agreements; and the conduct of enforcement actions through judicial or administrative litigation. Provides oversight over legal advice given and written work product produced within the OCR Office and assuring that the OCR Office's legal work is consistent, both within the Office and compared to other OCR Offices. Maintains close working relationships with counterpart Chief Attorneys from other OCR Offices. Supervises all General Attorneys in the OCR Office. Provides advice on all aspects of program operations within the regional office. Assists in the management of the office's enforcement program which ensures civil rights compliance by recipients of Federal funds through the conduct of complaint investigations and proactive compliance activities. Provides professional leadership and guidance to office in planning, developing, and carrying out program objectives. Manages, plans, and delivers high quality training programs for regional staff. Initiates, plans and conducts regional or national meetings, workshops, and seminars.
________________________________
QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED:
Professional Legal Experience Requirement: Five years of professional legal experience. This experience must clearly indicate that you independently perform complex legal work in the civil rights field or a closely related field. You must have one year of specialized experience at a level close to the work of this job that has given you the particular knowledge, skills, and abilities required to successfully perform the duties of this position. Typically, we would find this experience in work within this field or a field that is closely related. This experience must be equivalent to that of the duties of a GS-14 Attorney in Federal service.


You must be a member in good standing of the Bar of a State, District of Columbia, or Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

PROOF OF ADMISSION TO THE BAR MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION.

You must be a graduate from a law school accredited by the American Bar Association and be a member in good standing of the Bar of a state, territory of the United States, District of Columbia, or Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Applicants must have 1 year specialized experience equivalent to at least GS-14 grade level.

APPLICANTS MUST MEET ALL QUALIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS BY THE CLOSING DATE OF THIS VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT.
HOW YOU WILL BE EVALUATED:
You will be evaluated to determine if you meet qualifications required, and on the extent to which your application shows that you possess the knowledge, skills and abilities associated with this position as defined below. Please be sure to give examples in your resume and explain how often you used these skills, the complexity of the knowledge you possessed, the level of people you interacted with, and the complexity and sensitivity of the issues you handled. 1. Expert knowledge of civil rights laws and regulations enforced by the OCR. 2. Knowledge of management principles, techniques and methods in the areas of organizational design, administration, labor and personnel management. 3. Ability to lead and develop program staff as well as manage, plan and deliver high quality programs for regional staff. 4. Strong analytical, communication, teamwork, and writing skills.
To preview questions please click here<https://jobs.mgsapps.monster.com/edu/vacancy/previewVacancyQuestions.hms?orgId=1&jnum=61803>.
________________________________
BENEFITS:
You can review our benefits at: https://jobs.mgsapps.monster.com/edu/vacancy/preview!benefits.hms?orgId=1&jnum=61803


OTHER INFORMATION:
This position is excepted from the competitive service.

The Federal Government is committed to expanding access to employment by hiring people with disabilities; providing technical assistance and information on reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities; and identifying and removing barriers to work. Persons with disabilities may apply for jobs filled either competitively (where qualified individuals compete with one another through a structured process), non competitively (where a qualified individual may be selected based on a special appointing authority), or through an excepted appointing authority for people with disabilities (i.e. Schedule A). People who are selected for a Federal job must meet the qualifications requirements for the position and be able to perform the essential duties of the job. For information on "People with Disabilities" please visit Job Seekers with Disabilities <http://opm.gov/disability/PeopleWithDisabilities.asp>

Applicants selected for positions are subject to a background check to verify that he or she has not defaulted on any loan funded or guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education. Applicants found to be in default will be contacted to make arrangements for repayment prior to being made an official offer of employment.

Veterans interested in receiving tips on preparing a Federal resume and/or how to prepare for an interview, may send an email to Iwork at ed.gov to schedule an appointment for a session. Veterans Counseling Session must be placed in the subject line of the email.

Additional selections may be made within 90 days from the opening date of this vacancy announcement should vacancies occur.
________________________________
HOW TO APPLY:
Please carefully read the information provided under the link listed below. The section entitled "How to Apply" provides detailed instructions on faxing your supporting documentation. All required supporting documentation MUST be received by midnight Eastern Time on the closing date of the announcement. Although we do not require a specific format, certain information is required to determine if you are qualified. To receive full consideration, you MUST SUBMIT the following information: 1) Resume (submit on-line) 2) You must submit a photocopy of current membership in such Bar as would permit the practice of law. Membership must be in good standing. Be sure work experiences listed on your application include: job titles, duties and accomplishments, employer's name, specify full-time or part-time (list number of hours per week if part-time), beginning/ending employment dates (month/year) and annual salary. Required Documents<http://www.ed.gov/about/jobs/open/edhires/appendix.html>

REQUIRED DOCUMENTS:
You must submit your resume and copy of current Bar membership card on-line and answer the related assessment question.
AGENCY CONTACT INFO:
Brandice Butler
Phone: 202-453-6616
Fax: 000-000-0000
Email: brandice.butler at ed.gov
Agency Information:
EDUCATION-OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS
1000 2nd Ave
Seattle, WA
98104
US
Fax: 000-000-0000
WHAT TO EXPECT NEXT:
Once the announcement is closed, the applications will be referred to the Office for Civil Rights Attorney Evaluation Committee who will conduct an evaluation of your qualifications and determine your ranking. The most highly qualified candidates will be referred to the hiring manager for further consideration and possible interview. Management is expected to make a selection as promptly as possible after the closing date of this vacancy announcement. You will be notified if you are selected for an interview.

Control Number: 376763600
Close<javascript:window.close()> Print<javascript:window.print()>
Back to top<https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/PrintPreview/TopofPage>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 16193 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20140730/e0b3a80d/attachment-0004.png>

From Susan.Kelly at pima.gov  Wed Jul 30 15:40:21 2014
From: Susan.Kelly at pima.gov (Susan Kelly)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:40:21 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] Newly appointed
In-Reply-To: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
References: <000e01cfabb1$65a18900$8c0fa8c0@yourpc79505e9b>
Message-ID: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380BBA30@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>

Congratulations!

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Rene via blindlaw
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 9:48 PM
To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
Subject: [blindlaw] Newly appointed

Hi listmates,

Just wanted to let you know that the Washington State Bar Association's Board of Governors this last weekend voted unanimously to appoint me to the WSBA Character and Fitness Board.  This is a three-year term.  As with most state bar associations, the Character and Fitness board conducts hearings and makes recommendations to the state supreme court regarding applicants for admission to the bar whose fitness to practice has come into question.  It also hears complaints regarding lawyers whose conduct violates the Rules of Professional Conduct and makes recommendations regarding their ongoing fitness to practice.

At the same meeting, the Board of Governors confirmed my appointment to the Court Rules and Procedures Committee, that has jurisdiction over everything but the rules governing the practice of law itself.

The Character and Fitness Board has input into the Admission to Practice Rules and the questions asked of bar exam applicants on their admission forms.  This is important because there has been a growing concern here in Washington and in other states regarding bar admission questions that challenge the character and fitness of applicants based on disability status alone, e.g. mental illness or the receipt of psychiatric treatment.

I raised the issue of the discriminatory impact of such questions to the BOG and stressed the importance of having someone on the board with an understanding and alertness to disability stigma, and they heard me.  They know that I want to see the definition of fitness changed and the application questions reworded to address conduct rather than diagnosis.

This board and committee work will be very demanding, physically and emotionally, and will be done in addition to my own lawyering job.  I'll need your support and encouragement as the months go by, even though the substance of what I do will be confidential. I hope I can count on you all.  Because, in some way, when one of us gets recognized like this, we all share in it.This is your victory too.

Best regards,

Elizabeth Rene
_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/susan.kelly%40pima.gov


From rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 31 07:50:29 2014
From: rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com (Rahul Bajaj)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 13:20:29 +0530
Subject: [blindlaw] Track Changes
Message-ID: <CADFycPbN=xV5BROTr=tfVwxFQ3mZf2u60+p5N-OCb=HLYSU-PQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I hope this message finds you well.
I'd be very grateful if some of you could share the strategies that
you employ for using track changes effectively.
I can't find a lot of useful material online which grapples with the
challenge of using track changes as a JAWS user. I find it very
difficult to make sense of the information that JAWS conveys when the
track mode is turned on. More specifically, it is difficult to
determine what information has been precisely inserted or deleted and
this becomes all the more difficult when multiple people have edited
the document.
I am not very familiar with the skim reading functionality offered by
JAWS, so I'd love to know if skim reading can be an effective tool for
determining what changes have been made to a document.
As per my understanding, you cannot determine the color in which
changes made by different people should appear in MS Word, so I'm
wondering if skim reading would be of much use in this context.

I'd love to hear your views/suggestions.

Best,
Rahul


From Susan.Kelly at pima.gov  Thu Jul 31 15:07:40 2014
From: Susan.Kelly at pima.gov (Susan Kelly)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:07:40 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] ADA question
Message-ID: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380BC3AD@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>

I am employed by a local (county public defender) government agency.  Over the years, my direct supervisor and I have battled with our bosses and the county over the provision of adequate computers and related accommodations to allow me to continue to be effective in my position, which I have held since before becoming blind.  We have repeatedly been put off and promised that eventually things would be stabilized; in the meantime, I am expected to continue to work at the same pace as before I lost my vision.  As a result, my family and I have scrimped and saved in order to expend our own money in an effort to procure tools to assist me in my work, which the office has refused to compensate in any way.

The latest issue that has arisen is due to a re-design of the appellate court web-site that has rendered it largely inaccessible.  This, in turn, has required even more after hours work by myself and my assistant, who verbally records all disclosure and transcripts which cannot be read or made intelligible by JAWS, as well as doing all of the work necessary in the wholly inaccessible electronic file management system which was purchased by our main office.  At this point, I would estimate that each of us puts in roughly 10 to 12 hours per day, plus an additional 5 or 6 hours on the weekends, just to keep up with the expected workload.  Of course, we are only paid based upon a 40 hour / week basis.  We have just learned that the main office has absolutely no intention of upgrading or replacing my equipment, and believes that the appellate court issue is not their problem.  The appellate court appears to have a similar attitude, despite the recent settlement agreement in another state.

I appreciate the fact that I at least have a paying job, and do not wish to risk that.  However, if anyone has any suggestions as to how we might encourage my office to actually provide a reasonable accommodation?

From slabarre at labarrelaw.com  Thu Jul 31 15:43:35 2014
From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:43:35 -0600
Subject: [blindlaw] ADA question
In-Reply-To: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380BC3AD@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>
References: <BE4C4D55ED9DAD44AF21164D4915BF72380BC3AD@SPEXCHMB01.central.pima.gov>
Message-ID: <03d101cfacd6$3172f530$9458df90$@labarrelaw.com>

Susan, please contact me off line about this at slabarre at labarrelaw.com
and/or 303 504-5979.

Thanks,
Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Susan Kelly
via blindlaw
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 9:08 AM
To: Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: [blindlaw] ADA question

I am employed by a local (county public defender) government agency.  Over
the years, my direct supervisor and I have battled with our bosses and the
county over the provision of adequate computers and related accommodations
to allow me to continue to be effective in my position, which I have held
since before becoming blind.  We have repeatedly been put off and promised
that eventually things would be stabilized; in the meantime, I am expected
to continue to work at the same pace as before I lost my vision.  As a
result, my family and I have scrimped and saved in order to expend our own
money in an effort to procure tools to assist me in my work, which the
office has refused to compensate in any way.

The latest issue that has arisen is due to a re-design of the appellate
court web-site that has rendered it largely inaccessible.  This, in turn,
has required even more after hours work by myself and my assistant, who
verbally records all disclosure and transcripts which cannot be read or made
intelligible by JAWS, as well as doing all of the work necessary in the
wholly inaccessible electronic file management system which was purchased by
our main office.  At this point, I would estimate that each of us puts in
roughly 10 to 12 hours per day, plus an additional 5 or 6 hours on the
weekends, just to keep up with the expected workload.  Of course, we are
only paid based upon a 40 hour / week basis.  We have just learned that the
main office has absolutely no intention of upgrading or replacing my
equipment, and believes that the appellate court issue is not their problem.
The appellate court appears to have a similar attitude, despite the recent
settlement agreement in another state.

I appreciate the fact that I at least have a paying job, and do not wish to
risk that.  However, if anyone has any suggestions as to how we might
encourage my office to actually provide a reasonable accommodation?
_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/slabarre%40labarrelaw.
com



From withat at msn.com  Thu Jul 31 17:19:10 2014
From: withat at msn.com (Johnston)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:19:10 -0700
Subject: [blindlaw] Track Changes
References: <CADFycPbN=xV5BROTr=tfVwxFQ3mZf2u60+p5N-OCb=HLYSU-PQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU437-SMTP473A9B2356350C3D52EC14D2E60@phx.gbl>

Hello.

I too have been unable to be very productive with track changes.  Maybe it's 
a JAWS shortcoming or maybe I have more learning to do.  One thing I found 
online is instructions for creating a shortcut that enables jumping to the 
next change.  It is something I need to do soon because finding changes can 
sometimes require moving line by line or even character by character.

Jay
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rahul Bajaj via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 12:50 AM
Subject: [blindlaw] Track Changes


> Hi all,
>
> I hope this message finds you well.
> I'd be very grateful if some of you could share the strategies that
> you employ for using track changes effectively.
> I can't find a lot of useful material online which grapples with the
> challenge of using track changes as a JAWS user. I find it very
> difficult to make sense of the information that JAWS conveys when the
> track mode is turned on. More specifically, it is difficult to
> determine what information has been precisely inserted or deleted and
> this becomes all the more difficult when multiple people have edited
> the document.
> I am not very familiar with the skim reading functionality offered by
> JAWS, so I'd love to know if skim reading can be an effective tool for
> determining what changes have been made to a document.
> As per my understanding, you cannot determine the color in which
> changes made by different people should appear in MS Word, so I'm
> wondering if skim reading would be of much use in this context.
>
> I'd love to hear your views/suggestions.
>
> Best,
> Rahul
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/withat%40msn.com
> 



From dbeitz at wiennergould.com  Thu Jul 31 17:27:52 2014
From: dbeitz at wiennergould.com (Dan Beitz)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 17:27:52 +0000
Subject: [blindlaw] Track Changes
In-Reply-To: <BLU437-SMTP473A9B2356350C3D52EC14D2E60@phx.gbl>
References: <CADFycPbN=xV5BROTr=tfVwxFQ3mZf2u60+p5N-OCb=HLYSU-PQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU437-SMTP473A9B2356350C3D52EC14D2E60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <AA0FA234D2A3A745A64FC025D904D681AA98B6@DAGN15c-e6.exg6.exghost.com>

First, in case you didn't know, control shift E is a word toggle to turn on and off track changes.  Then, it is easier if you hit the jaws key, insert z, to turn quick keys on.  Then, you can hit the r key to jump from revision to revision.  You can't type in information with Quick keys on, it is like using internet explorer.  So you have to hit insert Z again to toggle quick keys off.  Insert Z is a toggle. 


Daniel K. Beitz
Wienner & Gould, P.C.
950 University Dr., Ste. 350
Rochester, MI  48307
Phone:  (248) 841-9405
Fax:  (248) 652-2729
dbeitz at wiennergould.com

www.wiennergould.com

This email transmission and any documents, files or previous email messages attached
to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged.  If you are
not the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering this email
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
or distribution or use of any of the information contained herein or attached to
this email is strictly prohibited.  Should you receive this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this email or by telephoning
us at (248) 841-9400.

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Johnston via blindlaw
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 1:19 PM
To: Rahul Bajaj; Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Track Changes

Hello.

I too have been unable to be very productive with track changes.  Maybe it's a JAWS shortcoming or maybe I have more learning to do.  One thing I found online is instructions for creating a shortcut that enables jumping to the next change.  It is something I need to do soon because finding changes can sometimes require moving line by line or even character by character.

Jay
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rahul Bajaj via blindlaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 12:50 AM
Subject: [blindlaw] Track Changes


> Hi all,
>
> I hope this message finds you well.
> I'd be very grateful if some of you could share the strategies that
> you employ for using track changes effectively.
> I can't find a lot of useful material online which grapples with the
> challenge of using track changes as a JAWS user. I find it very
> difficult to make sense of the information that JAWS conveys when the
> track mode is turned on. More specifically, it is difficult to
> determine what information has been precisely inserted or deleted and
> this becomes all the more difficult when multiple people have edited
> the document.
> I am not very familiar with the skim reading functionality offered by
> JAWS, so I'd love to know if skim reading can be an effective tool for
> determining what changes have been made to a document.
> As per my understanding, you cannot determine the color in which
> changes made by different people should appear in MS Word, so I'm
> wondering if skim reading would be of much use in this context.
>
> I'd love to hear your views/suggestions.
>
> Best,
> Rahul
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/withat%40msn.com
> 


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dbeitz%40wiennergould.com