text:
Interview: Optimizing the Cell Collection Network to Support the Commercialization of Cell and Gene Therapies
Featuring Amy Hines, RN, BSN, Director of Collection Network Management, Kimberly Kasow, DO, and Sandra Hoffman, MT (ASCP) SSB, CQA (ASQ)Download
Cell therapy supply chain delivery solution
When a patient's therapy relies on cells arriving intact and when and where they're needed, high-touch end-to-end supply chain experience matters. Our experience allows us to quickly and reliably facilitate personalized small-batch therapies with high-quality and low cost.
This isn't your average supply chain and drug manufacturing challenge.
Coordinating cell therapy logistics is extraordinarily complex. Cell therapies like chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) require rapid turnaround. And, you have to be ready for challenges traditional drug manufacturers don't face.
Patients may become too ill for apheresis on the scheduled date, or the collection may not go as planned. Manufacturing of cell therapies might take longer than anticipated and manufacturing yields might be lower than ideal, requiring additional cell collection.
Overcoming challenges to deliver cells when and where they're needed requires more than technology.
Our parent company, NMDP/Be The Match has 30 years of experience managing more than 80,000 hematopoietic cell transplants around the world.
Through that experience, we've learned that cell therapy logistics requires high-touch personalized patient management supported by technology. Because you're treating a person, not just a disease.
In order to deliver the supply chain solution you need, the patient needs to be at the center of everything you do.
Our experienced case managers develop and manage all aspects of the patient case plan and troubleshoot unexpected disruptions that occur.
This high-touch, end-to-end patient management ensures the on-time and compliant transport of cells from the patient to the cell therapy manufacturer and back to the patient.
Our customizable cell therapy supply chain delivery solution includes:
Personalized Case Management
- Create and manage patient-specific management plans to achieve desired treatment timeline
- Coordinate and manage all aspects of the plan, from collection to manufacturing to delivery of the cell therapy to the infusion center, through the support of our case management staff and an underlying technology platform
- Troubleshoot disruptions and variability inherent to patient-involved therapies to ensure that patient care is delivered on time
- Provide services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year
Cell Therapy Network Access
- Manage a network of more than 500 apheresis, transplant, blood and related centers for product collection and delivery that meets regulatory requirements and client specifications
- Conduct audits to ensure ongoing compliance
Logistics Management
- Provide reliable and proven delivery of collected cellular materials from collection centers to manufacturing centers to infusion centers
- Supply shipment tracking and communication using BioTherapies' proprietary technology platform, including chain of custody utilizing ISBT 128 labeling to provide unique and comprehensive coding methodology for each collection
- Offer regulatory support to ensure compliance with FDA Good Tissue Practices (GTP) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
- Develop transport solutions based on client-specific needs (e.g., transport of both cryo-preserved and fresh product)
When challenges arise, our case managers know how to navigate them.
Our high-touch case management approach allows our patient case managers like Jane to quickly troubleshoot problems that arise. This ensures the compliant and on-time transport of cells to and from centralized manufacturing sites.
Cell sourcing solution
Our cell sourcing solution provides you with the expertise, processes and regulatory insight needed to acquire allogeneic donor cells fully consented for research, clinical or commercial use.
Acquiring consented donor cells with specific characteristics takes experience.
Through the Be The Match Registry®, Be The Match BioTherapies® brings you access to nearly 16 million U.S.-based potential donors and 225,000 umbilical cord blood units with both rare and common haplotypes. This donor pool can also be searched to find rare cell types for R&D and commercialization.
You need established processes for donor consent and cell delivery that meet regulatory and legal requirements for commercial development.
For 30 years our parent company, the National Marrow Donor Program® (NMDP)/Be The Match® has used an established process for identifying and consenting donors on the registry.
The experience we've gained allows us to find the donors you need, contact potential donors to explain the opportunity and facilitate full consent for research, clinical or commercial development.
Once we receive consent, we'll help you manage your operational process, including cell collection and delivery.
Our mission is to save lives through cellular therapy. By extending our Registry and unique expertise to new and emerging cellular therapies, we can help save more lives and improve the quality of life for patients.
Our customizable allogeneic cell sourcing solution offers:
Diverse Source Material Access
- Manage the largest and most diverse donor registry in the world with 16 million HLA-typed donors
- Offer high-resolution HLA typing of rare and common haplotypes
- Provide a variety of cell types, including bone marrow, PBMC (mobilized) and whole blood
Regulatory Compliance Expertise
- Expertise in protocol development that ensures donor safety, informed consent and compliance with necessary regulatory standards
- Manage IRB protocol submission and review throughout the process
- Ensure compliance with U.S. and other applicable standards for cell therapy donor starting material
Personalized Donor Case Management
- Contact the potential donors to explain the opportunity and facilitate full consent for research, clinical and/or and commercial development
- Manage the donor workup process to ensure the donor is both medically suitable and willing to donate
- Perform necessary screening and testing for donor eligibility determination per FDA and other applicable regulations
- Schedule donation with our cell collection network and coordinate logistics after the cells have been collected
- Ensure the safety and privacy of donors by following strict internal standards, plus all applicable regulations from governmental agencies
Cell Collection Network
- Develop and manage a national network of apheresis and blood centers for diverse allogeneic product collection—including whole blood, apheresis products, mobilized peripheral blood stems cells or cord blood—that meets regulatory requirements as well as client specifications
- Conduct audits to ensure ongoing compliance
- Provide ongoing and ad hoc training and associated documentation to ensure continued compliance
Cell Delivery
- Manage the delivery of donor cells from the collection center to the manufacturing location
- Provide regulatory support to ensure compliance with FDA Good Tissue Practices (GTP) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
When potential donors have questions, we have answers.
Kelly knows the kinds of questions potential donors may have. She's been answering them for more than 15 years. As a donor case manager, Kelly has extensive knowledge in the donor consent process, and managing the steps from donor work-up to cell collection scheduling through delivery.
Cellular therapies registry solution
Once your cellular therapy is commercially available, the need to store patient samples and report quality outcomes data for regulatory purposes will continue for years after a patient has received therapeutic intervention.
We provide the infrastructure and the expertise to collect, store and analyze outcomes data at any time points required by regulatory authorities.
Collecting and maintaining outcomes data is something our parent company, the National Marrow Donor Program® (NMDP)/Be The Match®, has done for decades through its research program the CIBMTR® (Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research®). In collaboration with the Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW), the CIBMTR securely collects and stores patient cellular therapy outcomes data and maintains long-term follow-up.
These data are routinely analyzed to help improve future outcomes for patients receiving cellular therapies, and can be further analyzed at any time points required by regulatory authorities.
Our cellular therapies registry solution includes:
Outcomes Data Collection and Analysis
- Provide customized data collection, secure data storage and custom data extracts
- Supply standard reports and analytics
- Offer scientific and statistical consulting for research design and data analytics
- Perform statistical analysis and interpretation
Biorepository Sample Collection, Storage and Analysis
- Collect patient samples per protocol requirements
- Process and store patient samples
- Retrieve samples and ship for analysis
- Facilitate centralized laboratory testing services and reporting


text:
Best Hacker's game in Top Video FormatNow you can enjoy Hacker's game in HD quality with duration 90 Min and has been launched in 2015-03-06 with MPAA rating is 7.
- Original Title : Hacker's game
- Movie title in your country : Hacker's game
- Year of movie : 2015
- Genres of movie : Thriller, Drama, Romance,
- Status of movie : Released
- Release date of movie : 2015-03-06
- Companies of movie : media in sy,
- Countries of movie : United States of America,
- Language of movie : English,
- Durationof movie : 90 Min
- Average vote of movie : 4.3
- Youtube ID of movie : 5NLgJh0FuNo
- Translation of movie : EN,FR,ES,
- Actors of movie :Pom Klementieff (Loise), Chris Schellenger (Soyan), King Orba (Russel Belial), Alena von Stroheim (Lena Leiboviz), Gayla Johnson (Alice), Circus-Szalewski (Chris)
Movie plot of Hacker's game :
Best Hacker's game in HD Format with movie plot "Hacker's Game is a love story between two hackers, Soyan and Loise. Like many other hackers, Soyan works for a company he previously hacked. This "online security" firm runs covert activities for high-profile clients around the world. Loise is a cyber-detective who investigates war crimes for a human rights organization. Obsessed with the truth, she also has spent years searching for an unknown person. The two hackers meet on a rooftop and bond together through a virtual chess game. But Soyan's employer, Russell Belial, has asked him to protect the same arms-dealer that Loise is determined to help to capture. Who will call the game now? What is Soyan's real goal? The pair embarks upon an intense but dangerous romance, playing an elaborate game of deception. After being in a virtual world, will Soyan and Loise risk everything for true love?" in HD format. Full Hacker's game in Top Quality by viewing the download link.
Now you can download full Hacker's game in best quality. See Hacker's game film with single submit the style by exploring the image from the sign in place button. Enjoy every one of the albums fresh movie having all much-loved movie loading! only play this movie Hacker's game right now for easy access this online movie. This is truly spectacular and can some of those rare amazing. The excellent was great around. Management, pictures and visual effects have been all incredibly innovative in addition to brilliant. The pleasure of the script, often humorous and has plenty of heart for those his characters are typical very well developed.
... Play Full Hacker's game in Top Quality 1080p ...
Director : Cyril Morin, Writer : Cyril Morin
Of course, now you can watch movie regarding Hacker's game 100 % length and get the link to this motion picture Hacker's game in high definition format.
Tags: hackers, love story,

subset: commoncrawl


text: > > I don't know about the Avant, but the exhaust between the 20v sedan and the > V8 are identical at least from the cat back. The exhaust from the UrS is > basically the same as well- you can bolt on a S4/S6 rear section onto a > 200q20v. > > Taka > Not to thread-heist, but that said, I am looking to buy a used center section for my 200 20v, as my center muffler is swiss cheese currently. Contact me offline if anyone has one they are looking to offload. Sorry for the on-list inquiry, no marketplace right now! Abe Berman Burlington, VT


text:
May 27
Freehand Background Fillers With A Twist
So you have purchased your machine and have been "panto-ing" every quilt in sight. Now it's time to come out from the back of that machine and freehand! In this fun filled hands-on class you will learn designs that can be used as tight background fillers or as a large all over design. Swirls, leaves, flowers and fabulous meanderings will be some of the styles you will learn.
Cost $199.00 + taxes
10AM-4PM Lunch is provided
Be sure to bring along a sketch pad and pencil


text:
The Nature Of The Holy Spirit
Is the Holy Spirit a Living Spirit Being in the Godhead?
What terms does the Bible use to refer to the Holy Spirit? Is the Spirit a living spirit being separate and distinct from God the Father and the Son, or is the Spirit just a power or a characteristic of God? Does the Holy Spirit possess the characteristics and do the works of Deity? Is He a Being in the Godhead?
The purpose of this study is to consider the nature of the Holy Spirit and especially whether or not the Holy Spirit is a Diving Being who possesses Deity as part of the Godhead, like God the Father and God the Son.
Our understanding of the nature of the Holy Spirit is necessarily limited.
Many things about the infinite, spiritual God are beyond our ability to understand as finite, fallible humans. Can we answer every question about the nature of the Father? If not, why should we expect to be able to answer every question about the nature of the Holy Spirit?
Often we are uncomfortable discussing the Holy Spirit, simply because we have not studied enough. We talk about the Father so often that we get used to the fact that there is much about Him we do not know. But when we have neglected studying the Holy Spirit, it bothers us to discover how little we know about Him. But there are some things we'll never know this side of eternity (Job 26:14; 36:26; 37:5,23; 11:7-9; Isaiah 55:8,9; Deut. 29:29).
On the other hand, there are many things we can know about Deity.
Even with limited understanding, we can know that the Father and the Son exist, possess Deity, and possess the characteristics of Deity (eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc.). Likewise, we can determine whether or not the Holy Spirit possesses Deity and the characteristics of Deity. That is the purpose of this study.
I. The Names of the Holy Spirit
The Bible often uses interchangeable terms for things. For example:
* God is called Jehovah, Almighty, or the Most High.
* The church is called the kingdom, body, house, or bride.
* The gospel is called the New Testament, the truth, the Word of God, the will of God, or the faith.
* Christians are called children of God, disciples, saints, or priests.
* Elders are called bishops, overseers, pastors, or presbyters.
In each case the different terms emphasize different aspects of the same thing, person, or concept. Likewise, we will see that the Scriptures use a number of names interchangeably to refer to the Holy Spirit.
A. The "Holy Spirit" (or "Holy Ghost")
Obviously this is a common expression. We will see it used repeatedly as the study proceeds.
[Psalm 51 :11; Isaiah 63:10; Matthew 3:11; 12:32; 28:19; Mark 12:36; 13:11; John 14:26; Acts 1:5,8; 2:4; 5:3,32; 8:14-19; 1 Corinthians 6:19]
B. "The Spirit of Truth" and "the Comforter".
John 14:16,17,26; (15:26; 16:7,13) – Jesus promised to send "the Comforter" even "the Spirit of Truth" to the apostles.
But in 14:26 He calls this one He would send the "Holy Spirit."
Hence, "Spirit of Truth" and "Comforter" here are simply other names for the Holy Spirit. This demonstrates that different terms are used for the Holy Spirit.
C. "The Spirit"
Often the Holy Spirit is called simply "the Spirit."
Matthew 22:43 – David spoke Psalms 110:1 "in the Spirit." But the parallel passage in Mark 12:36 says He spoke it by the Holy Spirit.
Mark 1:10 and John 1:33 – At Jesus' baptism, "the Spirit" descended in a form like a dove. But Luke 3:22 says this was the Holy Spirit.
Luke 4:1 – Jesus was full of the Holy Spirit and led of "the Spirit."
Acts 2:4 – The apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke with other tongues as "the Spirit" gave them utterance.
1 Corinthians 2:10 – The apostles and prophets spoke the will of God by revelation from "the Spirit." But v13 (NKJV) and John 14:26; 16:7,13 show this was the Holy Spirit.
1 Corinthians 12:7-13 – Miraculous gifts were given to men by "the Spirit," but 12:3 shows that this was the Holy Spirit.
2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5 – "The Spirit" is the earnest or pledge of our inheritance given us by God. But Ephesians 1:13,14; 4:30 say that this earnest or seal is the Holy Spirit.
In these passages "the Spirit" is simply another name used to refer to the Holy Spirit.
However note that, in other contexts, "the spirit" may be identified as a spirit other than the Holy Spirit (see James 2:26; Matt. 26:41; Ephesians 4:23; etc.). The context must determine.
D. "The Spirit of God"
The Holy Spirit is sometimes referred to as "the Spirit of God," or God may refer to the Holy Spirit as "my Spirit," or others may refer to Him as "His Spirit" (speaking in reference to God).
Matthew 3:16 says "the Spirit of God" descended on Jesus as a dove at His baptism, but remember Luke 3:22 says it was the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:17,18 quotes Joel 2:28,29 where God said "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh." But this was fulfilled by the coming of the Holy Spirit (vv 4,33).
1 Corinthians 2:11,12 – "The Spirit of God" revealed God's will, but v13 (NKJV) and John 14:26 show that this refers to the Holy Spirit.
Ephesians 4:30 combines the terms as the "Holy Spirit of God."
1 Thessalonians 4:8; Psalm 51:11; and Isaiah 63:10 combine "Holy Spirit" with "My Spirit" or "His Spirit" speaking of God.
Acts 5:3,9 use Holy Spirit and "Spirit of the Lord" interchangeably.
Hence "Spirit of God," "My Spirit" (God speaking), etc., are other names for the Holy Spirit. Question: Can you find any instance where you can prove these phrases refer to anyone other than the Holy Spirit?
[Matthew 12:18,28 with Isaiah 42:1; Matt, 12:32; Luke 4:1; Acts 10:38.]
II. A Living Spirit Being
Like other Bible words, "spirit" can have different meanings depending on context. Consider some alternative ways "spirit" may be used in the Bible. Then we will consider which of these meanings applies to the "Holy Spirit."
A. Alternative Meanings of the Word "Spirit"
A living spirit being
"Spirit" can refer to a person or living being who possesses the characteristics of a person or living individual separate and distinct from other such beings. The Bible mentions several kinds of living beings or individuals who are spirit beings (or in some cases, like man, a spirit dwelling in a body).
* God the Father and Jesus the Son – John 4:23,24; Luke 23:46
* Angels – Hebrews 1:13,14
* Satan and demons – Matthew 8:16; 12:24,43-45; Mark 1:23-27
* Human beings – 1 Corinthians 15:35,44; James 2:26; Luke 8:55; Acts 7:59; 17:16; 1 Corinthians 2:11
Note that the spirit of each such individual being is separate and distinct from the spirits or other living beings. For example, the Father is a Being whose spirit is separate and distinct from the spirits of angels and men, etc. The spirit of each angel is separate and distinct from the spirit of the Father and from other angels, etc.
The characteristics, qualities, or attitudes possessed of expressed by a person
"Spirit" in this sense can refer to some aspect of a person's personality disposition, nature, character, etc. Examples:
Luke 1:17 – John came in "the spirit and power of Elijah."
Romans 11:8 – A spirit of slumber ("stupor" – ASV)
1 Corinthians 4:21; Galatians 6:1 – A spirit of meekness.
2 Timothy 1:7 – A spirit of fear contrasted to a spirit of power and of love and of a sound mind.
1 Peter 3:4 – A meek and quiet spirit.
Many other examples can be given. The spirit of man is the inner man – the part that feels, wills, motivates, etc. So the real character of a man is determined by the nature or condition of his spirit. Hence, the word "spirit" came to refer to the various attitudes or qualities expressed by the spirit.
Note that each individual can have only one "spirit" in the sense that he is just one living individual being. Yet he may have many different "spirits" in the sense of qualities or attitudes. And in fact his spirit (in the latter sense) can even change as time passes.
B. The Holy Spirit as a Living Spirit Being.
Is the Holy Spirit a living spirit being separate and distinct from other spirit beings, like the Father and angels, etc.? Or is the Holy Spirit just a characteristic or an attitude possessed by God? Could the "Holy Spirit" be just a way of referring to the power, character, nature, attributes, or disposition of God?
The Holy Spirit possesses the characteristics and qualities of a living spirit Being.
Consider the following descriptions of the Holy Spirit. Would the following things properly be said of a mere characteristic or attitude? Or does this language demonstrate that the Holy Spirit is a person who possesses personal characteristics and qualities?
* He hears – John 16:13
* He can be lied to – Acts 5:3
* He makes decisions about right and wrong (like people do) – Acts 15:28
* He intercedes – Romans 8:26
* He has a mind – Romans 8:27
* He loves – Romans 15:30
* He searches – 1 Corinthians 2:10
* He knows (like the spirit of a living being knows) – 1 Corinthians 2:11
* He gives gifts – 1 Corinthians 12:8,11
* He wills – 1 Corinthians 12:11
* He grieves – Ephesians 4:30 (Isaiah 63:10)
The Holy Spirit is not just a characteristic or attitude. Rather He is a living Being who possesses the characteristics of a person.
[See also Romans 8:26,27; 1 Corinthians 12:8,11; 6:11; Matthew 12:31; Hebrews 10:29; Acts 5:9; 7:51; 8:29; 16:6,7; 13:2,4; 1 Timothy 4:1; John 15:26; 16:13; 14:26; 16:7,8; Ephesians 3:5; Revelation 22:17; Neh. 9:20]
He is referred to by masculine pronouns
This evidence may not be conclusive by itself apart from the point we just studied. But with the evidence above, it confirms the personal nature of the Spirit.
John 16:13,14 – "He," the Spirit of Truth, will guide you into all truth, and "He" (the Spirit) will glorify Me (Jesus). ("Spirit" here is neuter in Greek, yet "He" in both cases is from a masculine demonstrative pronoun.)
Ephesians 1:13,14 – The Holy Spirit "who" is the guarantee of our inheritance (NKJV). (This is a masculine pronoun referring to the neuter "Spirit." But note that some manuscripts here have the neuter "which" – see ASV.)
He is referred to along with the Father and the Son, who are surely living persons.
Matthew 28:19 – Jesus commands people to be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Clearly the Father and Son are living spirit Beings. How could the command make sense if the Holy Spirit is just a power or characteristic, rather than a living Being like the Father and Son?
2 Corinthians 13:14 – The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Since Christ and God are living Beings, how would this make sense if the Holy Spirit is just an attitude or characteristic?
1 Peter 1:2 – We are elect according to the foreknowledge of the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. The Father and Son are living spirit Beings, so the Spirit must also be. All three are here mentioned as being involved in our salvation.
Luke 3:21,22 – When Jesus was baptized, the Father spoke from heaven, and the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily form like a dove. This pictures the Holy Spirit as having life of Himself, like the Father and Son, and He took a separate bodily form.
These verses show the Holy Spirit to be acting jointly with other persons. Since He acts like a person along with other persons, this implies that He is a person like the other persons in the context.
[See also John 14:26; 14:16,17; 15:26; 20:21,22; Acts 1:4,5; 2:32,33; 10:38; Luke 1:35; John 3:34; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; 2 Corinthians 1:21,22; Ephesians 2:18; 4:4-6]
These points taken together indicate that the Holy Spirit is a living person or being. He cannot be just a characteristic, attitude, power, or influence. (This does not deny that He possesses characteristics and attitudes. But He is more than just a character or a power. [See Rom, 15:13,19.]
He is a living being. He possesses the characteristics of a person. He is referred to by terms that imply He is a personal Being. He does works and acts like a living Being. And He is described and classified along with other personal beings. We conclude that the Holy Spirit is a living Spirit Being, not just a characteristic or a part of another Being.
III. Distinction from Other Spirit Beings
Since the Holy Spirit is a living spirit Being, we must consider next whether He is a separate and distinct individual from other spirit beings.
A. Distinct from Demons, Humans, and Angels
Satan, demons, and humans?
Obviously He is distinct from Satan, demons, and humans, since by nature He is the Holy Spirit. Satan and demons are not holy, and all humans at times are not holy. So the Holy Spirit is not a demon or human.
1 Peter 1:10-12 – Like Old Testament prophets, angels desired to look into the things that had been prophesied in the Old Testament but were not revealed till the New Testament. But the Holy Spirit sent from heaven revealed these things. Clearly the Holy Spirit is here distinguished from angels even as he is distinguished from humans.
1 Corinthians 2:10-13 – Men cannot know the things of God, but the Holy Spirit knows and reveals the things of God. But we now know that the angels also did not know the things of God till the Holy Spirit revealed them. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is not an angel as surely as He is not a man.
Furthermore, it follows from these facts that, not only is the Holy Spirit not an angel, but in fact He is above the angels, even as He is above men. [Note that the Spirit cannot possibly be an animal or plant, since they don't even possess spirits.]
B. Distinct from the God the Father and Jesus.
Is the Holy Spirit a distinct individual from the Father and Son, or is He just another name for, or perhaps part of, the Father or Son?
The Holy Spirit conceived Jesus in the womb of Mary – Matthew 1:18,20.
Did Jesus conceive Himself in Mary's womb? Surely not, so the Holy Spirit must be a separate and distinct person from Jesus. [Luke 1:35]
All three were present at Jesus' baptism – Luke 3:21,22.
Jesus was on earth having been baptized. The Father spoke from heaven and acknowledged Jesus as His Son. And the Holy Spirit appeared in a bodily form like a dove. All three are present and distinguished one from the other. So the Holy Spirit is distinguished from the Father and from the Son, just as surely as the Son is distinguished from the Father.
Blasphemy against Jesus is not blasphemy against the Spirit – Matthew 12:31,32
Blasphemy against the Son would be forgiven but not so blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. But if the Holy Spirit is just another name for Jesus or just part of Jesus, then blaspheming the Holy Spirit would be blaspheming Jesus.
Baptism is in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – Matthew 28:19.
The Father and the Son are separate and distinct persons. The Son is not just another name for the Father, nor just part of the Father. So likewise the Holy Spirit is not just another name for the Father or the Son, nor is He just part of the Father or the Son. The verse lists three distinct living spirit Beings.
The Father and the Son sent the Holy Spirit
John 15:26; 16:7 – When Jesus was about to die and return to the Father in heaven (14:12,28; 16:7,10), He promised that afterward He would send the Holy Spirit to guide the apostles. Here you have one living individual Being sending another individual to do a work.
John 14:16,26; 15:26 – The Father also sent the Spirit. So both the Father and the Son joined in sending the Holy Spirit. But if the Son is a different Being from the Holy Spirit and as a separate Being He sent the Holy Spirit, then the Father must likewise be a separate Being who sent the Holy Spirit.
The Spirit is another comforter besides Jesus – John 14:16.
In sending the Holy Spirit, Jesus sent "another" (helper). ["Another" is from a Greek word meaning "another one of the same sort."]
But if the Holy Spirit is just another name for Jesus or for part of Jesus, then He did not send "another" comforter at all but sent the same one.
Ephesians 4:4-6 also lists the Spirit separately from the Father and the Lord (Jesus).
This passage mentions seven things of which, in God's true plan for man's salvation and unity, there is only one of each. But each item listed is separate and distinct from all other items listed:
The body is not the hope, the baptism is not the Lord, the faith is not the God, etc. Likewise, the one Spirit (a name for the Holy Spirit) is distinct from the one Lord (Jesus) and from the one God and Father.
2 Corinthians 13:14; 1 Peter 1:2
Both of these passages list the Holy Spirit right along with the Father and the Son. But the Father and Son are living spirit Beings separate and distinct from one another, so the Spirit must also be.
So the Holy Spirit is a living spirit Being, just as surely as the Father and Son are. But He is not the Father nor the Son, nor is He just a part of the Father and Son. Rather, He is a distinct individual. If we can understand how the Father and the Son can exist as separate individuals, then we can understand how the Holy Spirit can exist as a separate individual.
[Acts 10:38]
IV. Deity of the Holy Spirit
If the Holy Spirit is a living Spirit Being, but He is not the Father or the Son, then what position does He hold? What level of authority does He possess and how should we view Him?
A. He Is Not a Demon, a Human, nor an Angel.
The Holy Spirit is a living Spirit Being, but we have proved He is not a demon, a human or an angel. The only position left is that of Deity.
The Bible describes no other kinds of spirit beings other than those we have considered. Since the Holy Spirit is not any of the other kinds of beings, He must be Deity.
Further, we have learned that He is above all the other levels of beings, so this confirms that His position must be Deity. Those who believe otherwise are obligated to prove that some other level of authority exists.
B. He Is Referred to by Terms of Deity.
Acts 5:1-11
Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit – v3.
In so doing, he lied, not to men, but to God – v4.
Therefore, the Holy Spirit partakes of the character and nature of God, not the nature of men. He possesses Deity. Lying to Him is lying to God.
He is the "Spirit of God."
In studying the names of the Spirit we showed passages where the Holy Spirit is called "the Spirit of God." (See Matthew 3:16, cf. Luke 3:22; 1 Corinthians 2:11,12, cf. John 14:26; Ephesians 4:30). But how can He be "the Spirit of God" unless He possesses and partakes of the character and nature of God?
The spirit of a man possesses and partakes of the character and nature of man – humanity. The spirit of a demon possesses and partakes of the character and nature of demons – demonic. The spirit of an angel possesses and partakes of the character and nature of angels – angelic. It necessarily follows that the Holy Spirit could be the "Spirit of God" only if he possesses and partakes of the nature of God – Deity.
But we have already proved that the Holy Spirit is a living Spirit Being, and He is a distinct individual from the Father and the Son. So the Holy Spirit is a living Spirit Being who possesses the character and nature of Deity. He is a Being in the Godhead, just as the Father and the Son are.
C. He Possesses the Character and Does the Works of Deity.
Creation, sustaining creation, and eternal existence
Genesis 1:2 – The Spirit of God (the Holy Spirit) was present at creation and was involved in it, even as were the Father and the son.
Psalms 104:30 – The context describes God's provision for animals and the creation. He sends forth His Spirit and they are created and renewed.
Job 26:13 – By His Spirit He adorned the heavens.
[Job 33:4; 34:14,15]
Everywhere present
Psalms 139:7-12 – In describing God as all-knowing (vv 1-6) and present everywhere, David asked, "Where can I go from your Spirit?" He then describes how the Spirit would see him everywhere.
All-knowing and source of revelation
Mark 13:11 – When inspired men spoke for God, it was not they who spoke but the Holy Spirit.
John 16:13 – He guided inspired men into all truth. He knows all and is the source of all knowledge. This is surely the work of Deity. What other being would be so described if it did not possess Deity? [14:16,17,26; 15:26; 16:7-14]
Acts 1:16 – The Holy Spirit spoke by the mouth of David. [Mark 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb. 3:7]
1 Corinthians 2:10-14 – The Holy Spirit (v13) knows the mind of God (like a man's spirit knows his mind) and reveals it to men.
Ephesians 3:3-5 – The Spirit made known the mystery of Christ, which had not been made known to men in earlier ages.
2 Peter 1:21 – Prophecy never came by man's will, but holy men spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
The message of the Scriptures is the message of God (2 Tim. 3:16). But the Holy Spirit is the Source Who had the power to reveal it.
Men acted as spokesmen or messengers, but they made clear it was not their message. They were not the source of origin of it, nor was it based on their authority. But the work of the Holy Spirit is contrasted to the work of the human teachers, in that the Spirit (along with the Father and the Son) is viewed as the source of the message and the authority behind it. This classes the Holy Spirit with Deity, not with lower beings. It attributes to the Holy Spirit the work and power of Deity.
[Isaiah 40:13]
Authority and unlimited power
Throughout the Bible, the Holy Spirit is spoken of as the source of miracles, but miracles are what prove the power of God.
Matthew 1:18-20 – Mary conceived in the virgin birth by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1:8; 2:4,33 – The Holy Spirit came on the apostles and gave them power to speak in tongues. [10:44-46; 19:6]
Hebrews 2:3,4 – God bore witness to the message of inspired men by signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit.
1 Corinthians 12:4-11 – All miraculous powers are from the Spirit (the Holy Spirit – v3). He distributed these to men according to His own will.
Who besides Deity is spoken of like this as being the source of miracles? What man or angel could be described as distributing such powers according to his will?
Men often did the miracles, but they repeatedly denied that they were the source of the power (cf. Acts 3:12; 4:10). By the very nature and purpose of miracles, their source must be God – Deity. Yet the Holy Spirit is repeatedly spoken of as the source of the power. This is evidence of Deity.
Matthew 28:19 – All nations are commanded to be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This passage places the Holy Spirit on an equal authority with the Father and Son. Baptism is in the name of all three. The name or authority of the Holy Spirit is the basis of baptism right along with the Father and Son.
To see the significance of this, would God ever command to do something in the name of the Father, the Son, and a human being or even an angel? Such is foolish to the point of blasphemy. If a thing is in the name of Deity, what significance is there in adding the name of a man or an angel?
Cf. 1 Corinthians 1:10-13 – Corinthians were divided over preachers. Paul teaches them in chap. 1-4 to emphasize Deity, not men, since men are just the messengers (3:3-11; 4:1,2). We should glory in the Lord, not in men (1:29,31; 2:5; 3:21).
To illustrate, Paul asks if he was crucified for us (v13). No, so Deity is important, not man. It would be blasphemy to exalt a man or angel as if he had died for us.
Then he asks if we are baptized in the name of Paul (v13). Again, we should glory in Deity, because we are baptized in the name of Deity. It would be blasphemy to be baptized in the name of any being that is not Deity. But we are baptized in the name of the Holy Spirit right along with the Father and Son. Therefore, the Holy Spirit possesses Deity as surely as does the Father and the Son.
The Holy Spirit does work and possesses a name/authority that only God can possess. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is Deity.
[Matt. 12:28; Rom. 15:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14]
Forgiveness, redemption, and sanctification
Matthew 28:19 – We are baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But what is the purpose of baptism? To forgive sins! See Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3,4; Galatians 3:27; 1 Peter 3:21. So the power and name of the Holy Spirit stands behind the forgiveness of our sins, right along with the Father and the Son.
But only God can forgive sins – Mark 2:5-7. Since baptism forgives sins, then to be baptized in the name of anyone other than Deity would be blasphemy! But we are baptized in the name of the Holy Spirit, as well as the Father and the Son; therefore the Holy Spirit possesses Deity. [Cf. 1 Cor. 12:13]
1 Corinthians 6:11 – Sinners are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God (the Holy Spirit). So the Holy Spirit justifies from sin, but only God can justify from sin. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is God.
1 Peter 1:2 – We are elect according to the foreknowledge of the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. Again, all three Beings are involved in our salvation. But sanctification is essential to our salvation as surely as election and the blood of Jesus. Only Deity can do this. The passage involves the Spirit in our salvation as fully as the other Beings of Deity.
Romans 15:16 – Gentiles are acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit has characteristics that only Deity possesses and does works that only Deity can do. Therefore, the Holy Spirit possesses Deity as surely as the Father and the Son do.
[2 Thess. 2:13; Gal. 6:8; Eph. 2:18]
Study of the Holy Spirit shows that He is not just a force or a characteristic but is a living spirit Being who possesses personal characteristics. He is not just a different name for the Father or the Son, nor is He just some part of them, but He is a separate and distinct individual Being from each of them.
Yet He possesses characteristics and does works that can only be true of Deity. He is referred to as Deity and classified as Deity along with the Father and Son. Therefore, He is a member of the Godhead.
We can understand that the Father and the Son are separate and distinct living Spirit Beings, yet each possesses Deity and therefore each should be viewed as God. In the same way we should understand that the Holy Spirit is a third distinct individual who also possesses Deity. Hence, the God we worship consists of three separate and distinct Beings, yet together they make up the one true and living God


text:
This wonderful nudge to our memories was first discussed last year. Through the efforts of both Jerry Donahue and Pat Urbut, we can now bring this book excerpt for your enjoyment. I apologize for how long this took to put together, but Pat Urbut emailed me about the author's permission just the day before I was hospitalized. I am happy to say that the excerpt is now available for you to read.
In an email from Jerry on June 28, 2016:
"The book that I mentioned is: "Chicago in the Sixties: Remembering a Time of Change" by Neal Samors, published in 2006 by Chicago's Neighborhoods, Inc."
For those who may want to explore this book further, a link to the Amazon page for "Chicago in the Sixties" appears here:
Once Jerry got us the name of the book and author, Pat took the reins, read the book and contacted Mr. Samors with the below email:
From:"Patrick Urbut" >
To: email@example.com
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 10:59:20 AM
Subject: Chicago in the Sixties
Hi Mr. Samors: I read your book only in the last year or so. I enjoyed your book and reminiscing about the changing times memorialized in your book.
I am particularly interested in one excerpt of the book written by Erin McCann on pages 50 to 52. She writes about my old neighborhood and parish on the south side of Chicago, St Ethelreda and Foster Park. I am a member of the Class of 1959 at St Ethelreda School and she was in the class of 1964. My class has a newsletter that is sent out monthly to less than 50 members (most of whom live outside of the Chicago area now). Since you are the author and your company, Chicago Neighborhoods, Inc. has the copyright for this book I am writing to you to ask if Sue Eberhardt Hurley, the editor of our newsletter can be given permission to publish the excerpt written by Erin McCann in one of the upcoming issues of our newsletter. Incidentally, I was raised in the block of 86th and Justine immediately to the south of where Erin McCann was raised. I doubt she would remember me since my class was 5 years ahead of hers but her sister, Rose Sullivan, who was in the class behind me at St. Ethelreda probably would remember me. Kindly let me know if you can extend permission to my class publishing the 4 page excerpt from your above named book in our class newsletter. ……."
Mr. Samors replied back to Pat with the following email:
Date: Sun, Oct 23, 2016 11:28 AM
To: Patrick Urbut;
Subject:Re: Chicago in the Sixties
"Patrick, I would be pleased to give you permission to use Erin's interview in your newsletter and I am certain that she would agree with me. Please be certain to credit the book and me for use of the interview.
Neal Samors"
According to Pat: "On pages 50 – 53 is a remembrance by Erin McCann who attended St. Ethelreda, Class of '63, then on to Mother McAuley and then Loyola University. She lived at 85th and Justine, and her dad ……
. …. was John L. Sullivan, who was the commanding officer of the Chicago Police Dept 's task force (until 1961) which handled the police detail and security at Comiskey Park, the International Amphitheatre, Wrigley Field, Soldier Field and other major venues. Erin and her family lived in the block just north of my block so I knew many of her neighbors. I also knew her Dad to see him because in 1960 I began working at these same venues as an Andy Frain usher. I saw first hand how great a job they handling crowds at Comiskey Park etc. They definitely served and protected crowds attending various sporting and political events like the 1960 Republican Convention at the Amphitheatre.
Several pictures of her dad are included in the article"
The beginning of the article is pictured below. The entire excerpt is available as a pdf by clicking on the picture of the text below.


text:
No. I am not referring to Obama delaying an announcement of amnesty until after the election (although I certainly could). I am referring to myself and to this post.
For I am announcing . . . that I expect to make a big announcement soon, perhaps next week.
So watch this space.


text:
When Sunderland's chequebook came out in the summer of 2010, up went the expectations at the Stadium of Light; only to then come smashing down to earth this sunny summer Saturday. Their £13m striker had bid his time on Wearside and was headed for a "holiday" in the United Arab Emirates.
"I have signed a one-year loan deal with Al Ain club in the United Arab Emirates," Gyan told Ghana Soccernet.
"I will continue to wear my favourite No.3 jersey at Al Ain as I begin a new adventure but with Sunderland still engrained on my heart."
Further to be confirmed by his new club, Al Ain.
"Gyan is arriving to UAE today evening at 12:00 AM with H.E Mohammed Abdullah Bin Bdoua, Al Ain Club Board of Directors member. The player will do the medical test to complete the needed documents for his profile in the club officially. The player got the number 3 which he used to wear in with his national team and all the other clubs he had played for."
The world stood still. What in the Lord's name had convinced Gyan to pack his bags and take his talents to the United Arab Emirates?
Gyan's representatives, it was reported, asked chairman Niall Quinn about a possible pay rise, but Sunderland didn't consider this an option at the time, with the player only a year into a long-term contract.
The idea that Al Ahin will increase Gyan's basic salary, and include lucrative bonuses based on goals and appearances turned his head. You might suggest that this was a clear case of Gyan thinking more about his bank monetary statements, than his talents that earn the money in the first place.
But in a breath, all of this comes with little surprise. Bruce had even warned against a possible move.
"Since that game at Wembley, all the parasites, as I call them, hover around," said Steve Bruce, Sunderland manager.
"People are in his ear constantly trying to engineer a deal for him. Certainly since the England game, when he played at Wembley so well on the night, something has been troubling him.
"It's very difficult, the constant speculation no matter what you try to quash or quell, and the people around him, the people who want to make a fast buck, and it affects him in the end.
"He was going from Real Madrid to Bayern Munich to Valencia to Atletico Madrid."
Al Ain it was. By a mile the most successful club in the UAE. The team that had won the 2003 Asian Football Confederation Champions League.
The prospects?
1.Gyan wouldn't be able to develop his own game. By moving to the United Arab Emirates, Gyan wouldn't have the luxury of improving his intangibles to be the top talent that he's been envisaged to be. He has shown the promise to be a world class player, only that he needed the bigger platform to learn his trade steadily and show a bit of it to the world. Reason you'd suggest he moved on from Udinese to Rennes and then to Sunderland. The whole idea of this move clearly speaks of Gyan being money-motivated, rather than seeking to improve his striking abilities.
Bruce, had before this day, challenged the Ghanaian striker to rediscover the form that had scared the bejesus out of defenders at the World Cup and that brought him 10 league goals following his move from French side Rennes in August 2010.
"We have had a discussion with him and he needs now to focus and get himself back on track again and be the Asamoah Gyan we know he is capable of," said the Sunderland boss.
"These things affect these players, and it has affected Asa."
"I had a conversation with him two days ago to say, 'Look, the window as now closed, Asa. Right, we need to see you back playing again and back the way you know you can play'."
2.He's out of the spotlight: Being at Sunderland presented Gyan with the near-perfect spotlight he needed in order to put his striking qualities to good use.
The English Premiership's massive TV deals meant Gyan had the best of leagues to show more of his good self as he had done in the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.
Now that he's turned up on a flight to the UAE, it is on a pension-mission, rather than to make a good bit of himself. He'd be playing in a poorer league, with little support base cheering him on, and surrounded by players who are nowhere near the needed quality to help him improve.
3.No big move move for Mr.Gyan. Again. Who, amidst the hardened global credit crunch era, will spill out another £13 million for a player whose head will be turned to the idea that he could be earning double-wages playing in another league? It's a move that clearly won't help Gyan in the long run. Even if he bides his time well at the club, the prospects of him getting another top club calling for him are minimal. This is saddening, looking at Gyan's talents.
The worrying question is why did Gyan decide to take his talents to Al Ain? Reports had been rife that he clearly wasn't satisfied with the £1.5m-a-year-wages he was earning at Wearside. There have been rumours he was unsettled with life at Sunderland, which was only further compounded by the club's reluctance to retain Sulley Muntari, John Mensah and his closest pal, Anton Ferdinand.
Others have suggested that Steve Bruce allowed Gyan to leave without a fight as he'd have lost the striker to a 5-week assignment at the African Cup of Nations in January.
But the manager told Sunderland's official website: "Anyone who has seen Asamoah play will know that he hasn't been himself in recent months. This option suits all parties at the present time and the club is well-protected in the deal.
"Asamoah has three years remaining on his contract and of course my wish would be that he finds his spark again and we see him in red and white stripes next season in the form that first attracted us to him."
That's the hope many Ghanaians hold up for now. That he finds the spark that Steve Bruce wishes he gets and finds the form that will be reminiscent of his good days.
Until then, wrong move, Asamoah Gyan, wrong move.
Pasted from <http://www.theelastico.com/?p=1260>
@Niilexis on Twitter


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
decided: April 12, 1984.
Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County in case of In Re: Appeal of Claude deBotton from the denial by the Zoning Hearing Board of Springfield Township of his Application for Variance and/or Special Exception from the present zoning classification to use premises at Church Lane and Baltimore Pike, Springfield, Delaware County, Pennsylvania, for commercial stores and offices, Nos. 81-02416 and 81-10484.
Donald H. Pugh, for appellant.
Michael Sklaroff, with him, Vincent J. LaBrasca and Thomas R. Eshelman, Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, and of counsel, Fronefield and DeFuria, for appellee.
Judges Craig, Doyle and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.
Author: Blatt
[ 81 Pa. Commw. Page 515]
Following the denial of a permit to develop a 9.722 acre parcel located at 950 Baltimore Pike in Springfield Township (Township) for commercial use, Claude deBotton (landowner) filed a petition with the Zoning Hearing Board of the Township (Board) seeking a "validity" variance and/or a special exception and, in the alternative, challenging the substantive validity of the Springfield Township Zoning Ordinance pursuant to Section 1004 of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC).*fn1
The Board denied the application for a "validity" variance on the ground that the landowner had failed to prove that the zoning ordinance deprived him of "any reasonable use of his land to such a degree that his land was confiscated". It dismissed the request for a special exception, holding that the ordinance contained no provision authorizing special exceptions. In
[ 81 Pa. Commw. Page 516]
a separate opinion, the Board also dismissed the landowner's constitutional challenges to the zoning ordinance. On appeal, the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County found that the Board abused its discretion, and it reversed the Board's decision, ordering that the requested variance be granted. The Township filed the present appeal.
Our scope of review where the court of common pleas has taken no additional evidence is limited to a determination of whether or not the Board committed a manifest abuse of discretion or an error of law. Marple Township Appeal, 440 Pa. 508, 269 A.2d 699 (1970). And, of course, where the Board's findings of fact are unsupported by substantial evidence, it has committed a manifest abuse of discretion. De Cristoforo v. Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment, 427 Pa. 150, 233 A.2d 561 (1967). Moreover, this court has repeatedly stated that substantial evidence consists of evidence which a reasonable man would accept to establish the fact in question. Snyder v. Railroad Borough, 59 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 385, 430 A.2d 339 (1981).
The Township argues that the court of common pleas exceeded its scope of review which, in this case, is identical to ours, Pyzdrowski v. Pittsburgh Board of Adjustment, 437 Pa. 481, 263 A.2d 426 (1970), when it weighed the evidence heard before the Board and reached a conclusion contrary to the one reached by the Board. And a careful reading of the court's opinion reveals that the court did in fact weigh the contradictory evidence offered by the parties at the Board hearings.*fn2 We are, therefore, constrained to agree
[ 81 Pa. Commw. Page 517]
with the Township that the court did exceed its scope of review.
As to the Board's decision, it found that the landowner's property is located in an area zoned special-use (S-U) which, under the ordinance, is restricted to the following uses:
A. General office building, bank, financial institution or theater designed as a single architectural project or unit, following review and recommendations by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Commissioners.
B. Laboratory (scientific or industrial research and development, testing, experimental), provided that:
1. No processing shall be permitted except insofar as such processing is incidental to research and development, process testing or operation ...
Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
July 19, 1994
LINDA KATSIAVELOS, a/k/a Constandina A. Katsiavelos, Plaintiff,
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF CHICAGO, GLEN BROOKS, SHERI BORMAN, and WILLIAM CONRAD, Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: WILLIAM T. HART
Plaintiff Linda Katsiavelos claims her former employer, defendant Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago ("FRBC"), violated the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791, 794a(a)(1), and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"). Also named as defendants are three vice presidents of the FRBC. Plaintiff claims the Rehabilitation Act was violated in that her handicap was not accommodated and she was discharged because of it. She claims Title VII was violated in that she was discharged because she is white. Plaintiff was discharged in 1990.
Defendants move to dismiss all claims except the Title VII claim against the FRBC. In response, plaintiff has agreed to voluntarily dismiss the individual defendants. She also has agreed to drop her demand for a jury trial and her prayer for compensatory damages. The only disputed issue is whether the FRBC is an entity to which the Rehabilitation Act applies. The FRBC claims it is not a federal entity to which that act applies. Plaintiff contends the Rehabilitation Act applies to federal instrumentalities and that the FRBC is a federal instrumentality. Alternatively, plaintiff contends the FRBC is judicially estopped from denying the applicability of the Rehabilitation Act because it successfully argued before the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") that plaintiff's Title VII claims were not properly before the IHRC because the FRBC was a federal instrumentality.
As a jurisdictional requirement for plaintiff's Rehabilitation Act claim to be considered, the FRBC must be an employer to which the Rehabilitation Act applies. Williams v. United States Postal Service, 873 F.2d 1069, 1071 n.1 (7th Cir. 1989). Cf. Rogers v. Sugar Tree Products, Inc., 7 F.3d 577, 579 (7th Cir. 1993) (Age Discrimination in Employment Act); Dumas v. Town of Mount Vernon, Alabama, 612 F.2d 974, 980 (5th Cir. 1980) (Title VII). Since this is a jurisdictional requirement, judicial estoppel cannot apply. See Williams, 873 F.2d at 1074. Just as parties cannot agree to waive jurisdictional requirements, a party's conduct cannot waive a jurisdictional issue. Judicial estoppel, therefore, cannot apply.
The FRBC has taken inconsistent positions in this case. Before the IHRC, it argued that it was a federal instrumentality and therefore the IHRC lacked jurisdiction under state law. In its present motion, it initially argued that the Rehabilitation Act applies to federal agencies and instrumentalities and that, contrary to its position before the IHRC, it is not a federal instrumentality.
In its reply, the FRBC again changes its position. Its final argument is that plaintiff's Rehabilitation Act claim may only be brought against a federal executive agency, not a federal instrumentality, and the FRBC is not a federal executive agency. Alternatively, it continues to maintain that it is also not a federal instrumentality. This court must consider substantial jurisdictional questions even if not adequately presented by one of the parties. A party cannot waive an objection to subject matter jurisdiction.
Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791, contains various provisions to encourage the government to employ the handicapped.
It established an interagency committee on employees with handicaps; required federal departments, agencies, and instrumentalities to establish affirmative action plans; required the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") to establish procedures for encouraging employment of handicapped individuals through state agencies; and required the EEOC to make an annual report to Congress. There was no express prohibition against discriminating against the handicapped in employment decisions and no provision for individuals to bring claims of employment discrimination against federal entities based on being handicapped. See McGuinness v. United States Postal Service, 744 F.2d 1318, 1319 (7th Cir. 1984).
In 1978, the Rehabilitation Act was amended to permit suits against federal agencies for discriminatory employment practices. Section 501 of the Act was not amended. Instead, a new section 505 was added to the Act which provided in pertinent part: "The remedies, procedures and rights set forth in section 717 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16), including the application of section 706(f) through 706(k) (42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f) through (k)), shall be available, with respect to any complaint under section 791 of this title, to any employee or applicant for employment aggrieved by the final disposition of such complaint, or by failure to take final action on such complaint." 29 U.S.C. § 794a(a)(1). The reference in § 794a(a)(1) to § 791 is somewhat misplaced in that § 791 does not itself prohibit handicap discriminatory employment practices.
Therefore, the incorporated provisions of Title VII must be relied upon in determining what conduct is prohibited.
Section 794a(a)(1) incorporates 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 which provides for Title VII claims against the federal government. That statute provides in part:
All personnel actions affecting employees or applicants for employment (except with regard to aliens employed outside the limits of the United States) in military departments as defined in section 102 of Title 5, in executive agencies as defined in section 105 of Title 5 (including employees and applicants for employment who are paid from nonappropriated funds), in the United States Postal Service and the Postal Rate Commission, in those units of the Government of the District of Columbia having positions in the competitive service, and in those units of the legislative and judicial branches of the Federal Government having positions in the competitive service, and in the Library of Congress shall be made free from any discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(a).
Clearly, the FRBC is not a military department, part of the Postal Service or Postal Rate Commission, a unit of District of Columbia government, a unit of the legislative or judicial branch, nor part of the Library of Congress. This only leaves the possibility of being an executive agency as defined by 5 U.S.C. § 105. That statute defines an executive agency as "an Executive department, a Government corporation, and an independent establishment." Clearly, the FRBC is not an executive department. A government corporation is "a corporation owned or controlled by the Government of the United States." 5 U.S.C. § 103. An independent establishment is defined as: "(1) an establishment in the executive branch (other than the United States Postal Service or the Postal Rate Commission) which is not an Executive department, military department, Government corporation, or part thereof, or part of an independent establishment; and (2) the General Accounting Office." 5 U.S.C. § 104.
Plaintiff does not contend that the FRBC is an executive agency as that term is used in Title VII. She instead relies on § 791(b)'s reference to federal instrumentalities and contends that the FRBC is a federal instrumentality. Section 791(b), however, only requires affirmative action plans; it does not prohibit discrimination in employment. It is § 794a that prohibits employment discrimination and that section incorporates Title VII's rules as to applicability to federal entities. Therefore, the FRBC must be an executive agency for plaintiff to be able to bring a handicap discrimination claim against it. Such a holding is consistent with EEOC regulations regarding handicap employment discrimination claims. See 29 C.F.R. § 1613.701-.709. The EEOC regulations provide that they are applicable to "executive agencies as defined in section 105 of title 5 of the United States Code and to those positions in the legislative and judicial branches of the Federal Government and the government of the District of Columbia which are in the competitive service [and] . . . the U.S. Postal Service and Postal Rate Commission." 29 C.F.R. § 1613.701(b)(1)-(2).
In a recently issued ruling, the EEOC ruled that Federal Reserve Banks are private employers under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), Title VII, the Equal Pay Act ("EPA"), and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act and not executive agencies covered by the federal sector provisions of the ADEA, Title VII, EPA, and § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. § 791). EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Coverage of Federal Reserve Banks, EEOC Decision N-915-002, 1993 WL 452695 (Oct. 20, 1993) (incorporated as an appendix to Vol. II of the EEOC Compliance Manual). The discussion in this ruling focuses on the language of the ADEA, but applies equally to the other statutes. They all contain similar language. See id. at n.1, 1993 WL 452695 at *6 n.1. The Rehabilitation Act incorporates the language of Title VII. The language of the ADEA regarding the federal agencies that are covered is identical to the Title VII provision. Compare 29 U.S.C. § 633a(a) with 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(a).
This court agrees with the analysis of the EEOC and adopts its reasoning. EEOC Enforcement Guidance at - , 1993 WL 452695 at *2-5. The regional reserve banks are not owned by the United States government. While regulated by federal statute and regulations, the regional reserve banks are not controlled by the executive branch. They act with sufficient independence under private ownership ...
Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
There, I said it. I'm exhausted !
This noon i was on the highway head to Port Dickson. Exactly, I went to there again . Not so strange for me. Enter to Cocobay Condo Resort. Take some pictures there.
Condo outside view
Oops.. Let's hard rock it !! pay attention to his clothes:-P


text:
Good call (Comment posted at Boots & Sabers).
The MN State Fair closes on the first day of the GOP Convention, 9/1. According to my friend, the Minnesota fair has the best food-on-a-stick of any state fair in the country. This could be a great opening for the Republicans.
Put together a commercial of McCain-Palin chowing on fried Twinkies on-a-stick and everything else that flyover America loves, and contrast that with Obama nibbling on his argula & sprouts.Posted by Headless Blogger on June 27, 2008 at 1758 hrs
It is uncomfortable to pat one's self on the back like this, but doesn't especially hurt.