We will continue to operate and trade as Barclays in Uganda for now. This is the next step in the journey of our brand changing across 12 African markets (subject to regulatory and other approvals).
It is important, because it is the next step in our journey to ultimately having one brand, Absa, across our operations (subject to regulatory and other approvals).
At the end of 2017 Barclays PLC had reduced its shareholding in Barclays Africa Group Limited (now Absa Group Limited) from 62.3% to 14.9%.
we can't legally use the name "Barclays" after 2020.
Barclays Africa Group Limited has changed its name to Absa Group Limited.
in Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.
We will keep you informed along the way.
In the interim, Barclays Uganda may be shown as 'part of the Absa family'.
But we'll let customers, colleague and stakeholders know in advance.
No. We will continue to operate and trade as Barclays in Uganda for now.
keep you informed along the way.
We know how important a decision like this is and therefore before coming to any conclusions, we consulted with colleagues, customers, stakeholders and regulators across the continent. The outcome of these discussions was twofold: we needed one brand to unite all our operations across Africa. The Absa brand is already well established, well-known with strong African and international banking credentials. Thus we chose Absa.
us as confidently as they always have.
Barclays PLC is no longer the majority shareholder. However, they do still have a significant stake in the business and remain a partner committed to the success of the group.
Our aspiration is to be an entrepreneurial, digitally-led African banking group with global scalability that makes a real and lasting contribution to our customers and to the societies in which we operate.
and communicating this rebrand has been well planned for.
What must I do if I receive an email or link asking me to provide my account details or information?
We will not be asking any customers for any information nor will we need you to update any of your personal account information or details as a result of this change.
This will not affect your accounts. You can continue to use all your Barclays products and services in the same way as you have in the past.
Yes - you will access Barclays products and services at branches as you have in the past.
You will continue to enjoy Barclays products and services the same way as you have in the past, but expect changes for the better in the future.
You will continue to enjoy your current interest rate with Barclays. Our parent company is simply hanging its name and that doesn't affect any other products and services you have with Barclays.
You will continue to enjoy your current loan with Barclays. Our parent company is simply changing its name and that doesn't affect any other products and services you have with Barclays.


text:
Q: Dynamically Create View with Many Shapes I am trying to dynamically create views made up of different shapes. Each view will be slightly different like these:
View 1

View 2
.
Once I have the information, how can I construct a view which contains multiple shapes like the ones above?
I tried using drawable but I cannot, because I want to do this dynamically and the lengths of the objects are fixed. What should I use to do this? Thanks a lot!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


The Life of Lynda Fund has so far raised more than £45,000 for The Salvation Army and Cancer Research UK.
In June 2011, Steve Hanover undertook a tenor horn & cycle ride. He stopped off along the route between Inverness and London and played his tenor horn. Over the 16 days Steve, with his son-in-law Dale, Steve rode 900 miles. Volunteers across the UK supported the fundraising project by holding concerts and other events.
The mission continues - more funds are needed to help these two amazing charities carry out their essential work.


Xsyon > Xsyon Feedback > Developer Zone > Developer Zone Archive > How do I cancel my Preorder ?
View Full Version : How do I cancel my Preorder ?
Not sure, But I would send Virtus (http://www.xsyon.com/forum/member.php/6-Virtus) a PM, And tell him you wish to cancel your Preorder.
if you pre-ordered via paypal there is no need to. If you pre-ordered via credit card click on my account on the menu bar and you can do it from there.
Hey Virtus, I'd like to cancel my pre-order. I clicked the cancel button in account management and it says that I canceled my monthly subscription, but it doesn't say anything about canceling my pre-order. After canceling the monthly subscription, I can still log into the game and play. Also, under "Main Page" in my account it still says that I have pre-ordered the game and still have forum access and a monthly subscription.
To be clear, I love the game. I pre-ordered a few days ago but found out yesterday that next month I'll be leaving on a 6 month trip. I'll likely pick up the game again when I return, so long as my clan is still playing.
I got the same thing i clicked cancel and it only canceled the sub but it still say's i have a sub and etc.
Same here... I would have expected no access and an immediate refund. Hoping this is coming.
I am having the same experience as the other posters. Clicking on cancel seems to only cancel the recurring subscription. I enjoy the game, but I am having hardware issues, and cannot reasonably play until I perform some upgrades. Didn't realize this until I logged in the first time.
I would like to cancel my pre-order until a later date.
I would say a Preorder is not a trial.
I also would like to cancel my preorder. How do you go about this? Seems to be a mixture of information here. I did my preorder via paypal.
I too would like to know how to cancel my pre-order before it's too late.
Xsyon (the "Service") is an interactive multiplayer online game world provided by Notorious Games, a Nevada LLC. It is not a product purchase. There are absolutely no refunds given on the establishment of an account and subscription to the service. The service is non-transferable. The Service is provided "AS IS" and is in a constant state of development and evolution. The experience of the online game will change over time. Signing up for the Xsyon service constitutes full acceptance of the Terms of Service http://www.xsyon.com/terms-of-service and in accordance with the Terms of Service, Xsyon is a changing online world affected by the players. As such the world cannot be used as a free trial. Free trials will be offered separate from the paid Xsyon Service.
^ This means that you won't get a refund, so don't expect one. Cancelling your pre-order would just mean that you won't get billed the 14.95 when your "Free time" is up.
For the people who paid using paypal, you won't need to cancel, because you weren't going to be billed again at the end of your "Free time" unless you set up billing information so your play experience would not be interrupted.
Actually these guys are pretty good about refunding cancelled preorders IIRC, I've seen them do refunds in the past. That is more or less a thing to cover them legally, but if you contact them directly they should be able to help.
Don't see why they would offer a refund... I mean - most people are just going to "try it out" and then ask for a refund... when it clearly says that it's not a trial.
Sure, they should have look at the features, problems occured recently, and then buy it if they want.
I'm not okay to refund someone because he does'nt take all the precaution before.
If they have a good reason, and it isn't live yet, what's the harm? the actual paid time hasn't started yet..
I'm referring to the initial $40 dollars. I don't think the 14.99 bills out until 2 months after launch anyway.


Crosstown Arts Shared Art Making is a workspace that provides anyone — from professionals to hobbyists — with common access to shared art-making facilities and equipment in digital arts, music, woodworking, printmaking, and photography.
Members share a common space to grow their creative practice with access to high-end equipment, facilities, instruments, and work areas, and a supportive environment with others interested in making and discovering. Shared Art Making is open to everyone at any level of expertise or experience via a monthly membership program. It's also the site for professionally led workshops and skills training classes on a variety of topics that inspire, cultivate, and enliven the creative Memphian.
Shared Art Making is for everyone — from MFA-trained fine artists and skilled, master craftsmen, to new artists or artisans looking to explore their creative ideas for the first time. It is an open, supportive environment that doesn't discriminate and thrives on the eclectic creative diversity among its members.
Walk-in tours are always welcome, but if you'd like to schedule a tour, email shared@crosstownarts.org.


text:
Fluff/Inspiration, Just my two cents, Other Systems, RPG
Every Icon(ic) superhero needs a super villain!
June 21, 2010 Sunglar	2 Comments
Let it never be said that I am a fickle fan! The superhero fever steamroller plows on unabated…
Recently I tried out the ICONS RPG random generation method and wrote a post about it. Te result was Mind Shadow, a super heroine I've become rather fond off. When I wrote up the character based on the random generation results I also created an enemy for Mind Shadow, Mindstrom!
This was my first attempt and creating a villain for ICONS. I didn't want to create an overly powerful villain, but tough enough to present a challenge to Mind Shadow and her (possible) allies. Here is the write up for the Mindstrom:
MINDSTORM
PROWESS 6
COORDINATION 6
INTELLECT 8
WILLPOWER 9
Mind Blast 8
Mind Control 8
Mind Shield 4
Telepathy 6
Catchphrase – "Your mind is my plaything…"
Epithet – The Ravager of Minds!
Driven to become more powerful
Enemy – Mind Shadow
Professor Aldo Walden was a renowned biophysicist working for a secret government project attempting to enhance the mental capabilities of soldiers. When a government investigation revealed mismanagement of funds and illegal trials on humans Professor Walden panicked and used the procedures he had developed on himself. When the men sent to arrest him arrived at the lab they found him comatose. Taken to a military hospital and placed under surveillance Aldo Walden remained in a coma for over a year.
Unbeknownst to his captors his mind had splintered into a thousand personalities now fighting for control of the powerful mind created by the experiment. One personality slowly emerged as the dominant one, a sadistic brutal aspect of Walden's personality, by the name of Mindstorm. When Mindstorm awoke he used his powers to enact revenge upon his captors and escape.
Using a variation of the suit developed as part of the original project, he embarked on a crime wave that made little sense to the authorities. All his crimes had the ultimate goal of allowing him to perform more experiments to enhance his mental powers and make him unstoppable.
While Mindstorm is in control of the splintered mind of Professor Walden, other personalities occasionally come to the fore and attempt to stop him. Containing the different aspects fighting inside his mind causes delusions, often Mindstorm looses touch with reality and fails to recognize when a plan has failed, fighting until captured.
During one of his incarcerations Mindstorm was responsible for giving his nemesis Mind Shadow her powers when he took over the hospital for the criminally insane and used the place to experiment with power enhancing drugs. Since all others who were given the drug died and she survived, Mindstorm has become obsessed with defeating the heroine and dissecting her to learn more about the effect his drugs had on her.
Well there he is! Creating a villain for ICONS is more of an art than an exact science. I've read the book but have not actually played yet. I think that is my biggest concern. I'm putting together a campaign to run when I take a break from my regular weekly Pathfinder RPG campaign, but I'll play a test run of the system soon to get a better feel for it. I'd love feedback from those of you out there who have actually played the game.
You can grab a PDF copy of Mindstorm here and one for Mind Shadow here.
Your thoughts and opinions are welcome.
Rolling up an Icon(ic) Superhero! Ask the Readers: Keeping up with super current events! Superhero Campaign Questionnaire (and about the Virtual Book Club…) Freebies: Marvel Super Heroes Super-Powered Bundles of Holding
Sunglar
Welcome reader, thanks for taking the time to find out just who I am! My name is Roberto, although in the Internet I usually go by the name of Sunglar. Long time pen & paper RPG player, mostly a GM for the better part of that time; some will say that's because of my love of telling a good story, others because I'm a control freak, but that's debatable… I was born, raised, and still live in Puerto Rico, an island in the Caribbean, with a small but active gaming community.
I've played RPGs for 30 years, and for most of that time I played D&D in all its various permutations, including Pathfinder and I'm currently playing D&D 5th edition. Other games my regular gaming group has played over the last few years include Mutants & Masterminds and Savage Worlds, but I have played many other games through the years, and plan to play many more. I am a compulsive homebrewer and rarely play a campaign I have not created myself.
You can follow me on Twitter as @Sunglar, and find me in Google+ also as Sunglar. I'm very active in Facebook where you can find me posting regularly in the Puerto Rico Role Players group. Looking forward to hearing from you!
Previous PostWhat about the Genius Guide to Mystic Godlings? A review…Next PostAsk The Readers: What's your take on Exalted?
2 thoughts on "Every Icon(ic) superhero needs a super villain!"
zon says:
What editor used to create the character?
Sunglar says:
@zon, the image was made with Hero Factory, here is the link:
http://fabricadeherois.blogspot.com/

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
The FOIA Project
Freeing information through public accountability
Agency Backlog/Processing Times
Agency Examination
Lawsuit Trends by Agency
Map Lawsuits
Media Litigants
Nonprofit Litigants
Feature on ICE
Search ICE Requests
User-contributed Requests
FOIA Lawsuits
Search Lawsuits
Search Appeals
Issues Search
About FOIA Request Data
About FOIA Lawsuit Data
About FOIA Appeals Data
About the FOIA Project
About the Freedom of Information Act
About Contributing Documents
[Subscribe to updates]
Case Title URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. et al v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
District District of Columbia
City Washington, DC
Case Number 1:2015cv01333
Date Filed 2015-08-17
Date Closed 2019-02-11
Judge Judge Amy Berman Jackson
Plaintiff URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.
Plaintiff ENERGY FUTURE COALITION
Case Description The Urban Air Initiative and the Energy Future Coalition submitted a FOIA request to the EPA for records concerning the EPAct Gasoline Fuel Effects Study. The EPA told the organizations that there were 83,000 potentially responsive records and that fees were estimated at $24,000. The agency encouraged the organizations to narrow their request. After narrowing their request, the agency still indicated that there were 36,000 potentially responsive records with a fee estimate of $18,000. The organization committed to paying legitimate costs, but the agency released only three documents and insisted that it could not respond entirely until 2016. The agency insisted that the organizations would not be given appeals rights until the completion of their request. The organizations then filed suit.
Complaint issues: Litigation - Attorney's fees, Adequacy - Search, Determination, Failure to respond within statutory time limit
Defendant GINA MCCARTHY
Complaint attachment 1
Opinion/Order [51]
FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ruled that the EPA failed to show it conducted an adequate search for records concerning the design phase of its EPAct Study on fuel effects on auto emissions, but that it had properly withheld 198 records under Exemption 5 (privileges), as well as withholdings made under Exemption 4 (confidential business information) and Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). The Urban Air Initiative and the Energy Future Coalition requested the records. The EPA disclosed more than 4,000 documents in full or in part, but the plaintiffs only challenged the agency's Exemption 5 claims. However, Jackson pointed out that the D.C, Circuit's ruling in Winston & Strawn v. McLean, 843 F.3d 503 (D.C. Cir. 2016), a non-FOIA procedural decision holding that the burden of proof rested with the party moving for summary judgment, required her to determine whether the agency's search was adequate, as well as the sufficiency of its Exemption 4 and Exemption 6 claims. The EPA contended that the design phase ended on March 3, 2009, but the plaintiffs argued that the design phase continued for another 37 weeks until the final vehicles were chosen for testing. Jackson sided with the plaintiffs, finding the agency had inappropriately narrowed the date scope of the request. She pointed out that "while plaintiffs clearly narrowed their request to distinguish records related to the design of the tests to be utilized from the results of the tests themselves, the request is broad enough to cover any efforts to fine turn and finalize the design of the study that may have occurred even after some initial testing had begun. EPA's search was incomplete because, even though March 12, 2009, may have marked the start of testing, it did not necessarily signal a complete end to design." She also faulted the agency for failing to explain why it did not use certain search terms specified by the plaintiffs. She observed that "plaintiffs sought documentation related to a number of topics, many of which were included as search terms. However, some topics, such as 're-design of fuel matrices,' were not included in the search in any way, and the declaration does not attempt to explain why this is the case." Relying on Petroleum Information Corp. v. Dept of Interior, 976 F.2d 1429 (D.C. Cir. 1992), a case in which the D.C. Circuit ruled that public records information about properties was not privileged merely because it was inserted into a database being developed by the agency, the plaintiffs argued that Exemption 5 did not apply to the development of scientific data. Jackson found the case was not relevant to the circumstances here since Congress had given the EPA considerably more leeway on how to conduct the study of fuel effects. She noted that "all of these choices were committed to the expertise and judgment of EPA, and the fact that the internal discussions leading up to the final conclusions entailed considerations of scientific principles does not mean that those discussions were not 'deliberative.'" Jackson added that "agency personnel engaged in extended discussions and analysis in order to execute the study, and EPA did far more that merely 'reorganize and repackage a mass of dispersed public information.'"
Issues: Adequacy - Search, Exemption 5 - Privileges
User-contributed Documents
Docket Events (Hide)
Date Filed Doc # Docket Text
2015-08-17 1 COMPLAINT against ENERGY FUTURE COALITION ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0090-4212240) filed by URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Declaration, # 4 Summons)(White, Adam) (Entered: 08/17/2015)
2015-08-17 Case Assigned to Judge Amy Berman Jackson. (sth) (Entered: 08/17/2015)
2015-08-17 2 SUMMONS (3) Issued Electronically as to ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(sth) (Entered: 08/17/2015)
2015-10-21 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Adam R.F. Gustafson on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 10/21/2015)
2015-10-23 4 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint by ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (Truong, John) (Entered: 10/23/2015)
2015-10-26 MINUTE ORDER granting 4 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall have until November 12, 2015 to respond to the complaint in this case. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/26/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/26/2015)
2015-10-28 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's Response to the Complaint is now due by 11/12/2015. (jth) (Entered: 10/28/2015)
2015-11-12 5 ANSWER to Complaint by ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.(Truong, John) (Entered: 11/12/2015)
2015-11-13 6 ORDER. Defendant shall file a dispositive motion or, in the alternative, a report setting forth the schedule for the completion of its production of documents to plaintiffs on or before December 11, 2015. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/13/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/13/2015)
2015-11-13 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's Dispositive Motion or, in the alternative, a report setting forth the schedule according to which it will complete its production of documents to Plaintiffs is due by 12/11/2015. (jth) (Entered: 11/13/2015)
2015-12-11 7 STATUS REPORT and Document Production Schedule by ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. (Truong, John) (Entered: 12/11/2015)
2015-12-14 MINUTE ORDER. In light of the representations contained in 7 defendant's status report and proposed production schedule, it is ORDERED that plaintiffs shall inform the Court of the grounds for their objections to the proposed schedule and provide specifics of what they would propose instead by noon on December 18, 2015. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/14/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/14/2015)
2015-12-14 Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiffs' shall inform the Court of the grounds for their objections to Defendant's proposed schedule and provide specifics of what they would propose instead by 12:00 Noon on 12/18/2015. (jth) (Entered: 12/14/2015)
2015-12-15 8 RESPONSE re 7 Status Report and Document Production Schedule filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 12/15/2015)
2015-12-21 9 ORDER REFERRING CASE for Mediation to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay. In light of the issues raised in the parties' recent filings regarding defendant's proposed production schedule, it is ORDERED that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay for mediation purposes to commence on December 21, 2015. The parties shall file a report advising the Court of the status of the mediation by January 29, 2016. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/21/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/21/2015)
2015-12-21 CASE DIRECTLY REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay for Mediation. (sth) (Entered: 12/22/2015)
2015-12-23 Set/Reset Deadlines: The parties shall file a report advising the Court of the Status of the Mediation by 1/29/2016. (jth) (Entered: 12/23/2015)
2015-12-23 MINUTE ORDER: Settlement Conference set for 12/23/2015 at 02:00 PM in Chambers [room 2333] before Magistrate Judge Alan Kay. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alan Kay on 12/23/15. (DM) (Entered: 12/23/2015)
2015-12-23 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Alan Kay: Settlement Conference held on 12/23/2015. (DM) (Entered: 01/05/2016)
2016-01-05 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Alan Kay: Settlement Conference held on 1/5/2016. (DM) (Entered: 01/05/2016)
2016-01-07 10 STATUS REPORT and Renewed Proposal for FOIA Production Schedule by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 01/07/2016)
2016-01-11 MINUTE ORDER. On December 21, 2015, the Court referred this matter for mediation and ordered that a joint status report be filed by January 29, 2016. 9 Order (Dec. 21, 2015). On January 7, 2016, plaintiff unilaterally submitted its own 10 status report instead. It is therefore ORDERED that defendant shall provide the Court with its current proposed schedule for the production of responsive records by January 12, 2016. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/11/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/11/2016)
2016-01-11 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant shall provide the Court with its current proposed schedule for the production of responsive records by 1/12/2016. (jth) (Entered: 01/11/2016)
2016-01-12 11 STATUS REPORT Pursuant to The Court's January 11, 2016 Minute Order by GINA MCCARTHY. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Truong, John) (Entered: 01/12/2016)
2016-01-13 12 REPLY re 11 Status Report filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 01/13/2016)
2016-01-13 MINUTE ORDER. After consideration of all of the matters set forth in all of the pleadings, the Court will exercise its authority to supervise and oversee production, see Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. FEC, 711 F.3d 180, 189 (D.C. Cir. 2013), by issuing the following schedule. It is ORDERED that defendant shall review and produce responsive, non-exempt, and non-CBI records to plaintiffs on a rolling basis on January 15, 2016, January 29, 2016, February 15, 2016, and February 29, 2016, and it shall produce all responsive CBI records not entitled to confidential treatment by May 31, 2016. It is FURTHER ORDERED that of the more than 15,000 records that have already been identified, defendant shall review and produce responsive emails first. The law is clear that it is not improper for a party to utilize FOIA to obtain records from the government for use in litigation. See, e.g., North v. Walsh, 881 F.2d 1088, 1096 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (rejecting agency's contention that the plaintiff was improperly using FOIA "as an adjunct discovery device" and emphasizing that "[t]he plaintiff's rights in a FOIA action do not depend on his or her identity" as a private litigant). But since the related matter pending before the D.C. Circuit is a challenge to administrative action that will be decided based upon the administrative record, and even plaintiffs' proposed schedule would provide for the completion of production after the date the oral argument in that case is scheduled, the Court does not believe that the February 11 date has a significant bearing upon what the schedule of production in this case should be. The complaint alleges that there was a delay in initiating any production at all, and that delay prompted this law suit, so given the time that plaintiffs have been waiting, the material that is of most importance to the plaintiffs should be produced first. But since the defendant is now making diligent efforts to comply with its statutory obligations, and it has modified the schedule it originally proposed to set interim milestones that require two partial productions in January, the Court will not order the defendant to accelerate the pace of production further. Defendant shall submit reports to the Court updating it on the status of the rolling production on February 1, 2016, March 1, 2016, and June 1, 2016, and those reports should indicate the number of records reviewed, the number produced, and the number of any records withheld in full or in part. On June 13, 2016, the parties shall submit a joint status report identifying any issues that remain to be resolved and proposing a schedule for further proceedings, if any. The defendant is not obliged to prepare a Vaughn index or to submit materials related to the adequacy of the search pending further order of the Court. Finally, the mediation referral in this case is hereby terminated and the requirement of the January 29, 2016 status report set in the Court's January 11, 2016 Minute Order is vacated. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/13/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/13/2016)
2016-01-13 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant shall submit Reports, updating the Court on the status of the rolling production on 2/1/2016, 3/1/2016, and 6/1/2016. Those reports should indicate the number of records reviewed, the number produced, and the number of any records withheld in full or in part. On 6/13/2016, the parties shall submit a Joint Status Report identifying any issues that remain to be resolved and Proposing a Schedule for further proceedings, if any.(jth) (Entered: 01/13/2016)
2016-02-01 13 STATUS REPORT by GINA MCCARTHY. (Truong, John) (Entered: 02/01/2016)
2016-03-02 MINUTE ORDER. Defendant shall submit a further status report on June 1, 2016, as outlined in the Court's Minute Order of January 13, 2016. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/2/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/02/2016)
2016-03-02 Set/Reset Deadlines: Status Report due by 6/1/2016. (tb) (Entered: 03/02/2016)
2016-05-20 15 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to produce Plaintiff's records under the Freedom of Information Act by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) (Entered: 05/20/2016)
2016-05-23 MINUTE ORDER granting 15 Motion for Extension of Time. The schedule in place in this matter is hereby modified as follows: on or before May 25, 2016, defendant shall produce any records for which affected businesses have waived confidential treatment; on or before May 31, 2016, defendant shall complete its confidentiality business determinations associated with plaintiffs' FOIA request; on or before June 22, 2016, defendant shall produce any additional records not entitled to confidential treatment; on or before June 23, 2016, defendant shall submit a report to the Court updating it on the status of its production; and on or before July 5, 2016, the parties shall submit a joint status report identifying any issues that remain to be resolved. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 5/23/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 05/23/2016)
2016-05-24 Set/Reset Deadlines: By 6/23/2016, Defendant shall submit a Report to the Court updating it on the Status of its Production; by 7/5/2016, the parties shall submit a Joint Status Report identifying any issues that remain to be resolved. (jth) (Entered: 05/24/2016)
2016-07-05 17 Joint STATUS REPORT by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 07/05/2016)
2016-07-05 MINUTE ORDER. In consideration of 17 the parties' joint status report and their respective positions on the schedule to be imposed in this matter, it is ORDERED that defendant shall complete its review of the documents withheld pursuant to Exemption (b)(5) by July 15, 2016; defendant shall file its motion for summary judgment by August 19, 2016; plaintiffs shall file their combined opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment (with a single combined memorandum in support) by September 16, 2016; defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by October 14, 2016; and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by October 28, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 7/5/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 07/05/2016)
2016-07-06 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant shall complete its review of the documents withheld pursuant to Exemption (b)(5) by 7/15/2016; Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is due by 8/19/2016; Plaintiffs Combined Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (with a single combined memorandum in support) is due by 9/16/2016; Defendants Combined Reply and Cross-Opposition is due by 10/14/2016; Plaintiffs Cross-Reply is due by 10/28/2016. (jth) (Entered: 07/06/2016)
2016-08-14 18 Consent MOTION to Modify July 5, 2016 Scheduling Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) (Entered: 08/14/2016)
2016-08-15 MINUTE ORDER granting 18 Motion to Modify. Defendant shall file its motion for summary judgment by September 2, 2016; plaintiffs shall file their combined opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment (with a single combined memorandum in support) by September 30, 2016; defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by October 28, 2016; and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by November 11, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 8/15/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 08/15/2016)
2016-08-15 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is due by 9/2/2016; Plaintiffs Combined Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (with a single combined memorandum in support) is due by 9/30/2016; Defendants Combined Reply and Cross-Opposition is due by 10/28/2016; Plaintiffs Cross-Reply is due by 11/11/2016. (jth) (Entered: 08/15/2016)
2016-09-02 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment by GINA MCCARTHY (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Declaration of Kathryn Sargeant, # 4 Exhs A to I, # 5 Exhs J to T, # 6 Exhs U to II, # 7 Exhs JJ to KK, # 8 Exhs LL to RR, # 9 Exh SS to WW, # 10 Exh XX, # 11 Vaughn Index (Exh HH), # 12 Declaration of Ronald Kalmbach)(Truong, John) (Entered: 09/02/2016)
2016-09-22 20 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File a Combined Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 09/22/2016)
2016-09-23 MINUTE ORDER granting 20 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiffs shall file their combined opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment (with a single combined memorandum in support) by October 14, 2016; defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by November 17, 2016; and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by December 1, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/23/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/23/2016)
2016-09-23 Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiffs shall file their combined Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (with a single combined memorandum in support) by 10/14/2016; Defendant shall file its combined Reply and Cross-Opposition by 11/17/2016; Plaintiffs shall file their Cross-Reply by 12/1/2016. (jth) (Entered: 09/23/2016)
2016-10-14 21 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment , by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Declaration)(Gustafson, Adam) Modified on 10/17/2016 (jf). (Entered: 10/14/2016)
2016-10-14 23 Memorandum in opposition to re 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (See Docket Entry 21 to view document). (znmw) (Entered: 10/17/2016)
2016-10-15 22 NOTICE of Filing of Exhibits by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. re 21 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis MOTION to Appoint Counsel MOTION for Briefing Schedule MOTION to Permit Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment MOTION for Limited Admission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits A-Q to Declaration of James R. Conde, # 2 Exhibit Exhibits R-BB to Declaration of James R. Conde)(Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 10/15/2016)
2016-11-02 24 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply and Cross-Opposition by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) (Entered: 11/02/2016)
2016-11-03 MINUTE ORDER granting 24 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by December 5, 2016, and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by December 20, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/3/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/03/2016)
2016-11-04 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's Combined Reply and Cross-Opposition is due by 12/5/2016; Plaintiffs Cross-Reply is due by 12/20/2016. (jth) (Entered: 11/04/2016)
2016-12-01 25 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re November 3, 2016 Minute Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) Modified event title on 12/2/2016 (znmw). (Entered: 12/01/2016)
2016-12-01 MINUTE ORDER granting 25 Motion to Modify. Defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by December 22, 2016, and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by January 26, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/1/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/01/2016)
2016-12-20 26 Consent MOTION to Modify December 1, 2016 Minute Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) (Entered: 12/20/2016)
2016-12-20 MINUTE ORDER granting 26 Motion to Modify. Defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by January 12, 2017, and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by February 16, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/20/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/20/2016)
2016-12-20 Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's Combined Reply and Cross-Opposition is due by 1/12/2017; Plaintiffs Cross-Reply is due by 2/16/2017. (jth) (Entered: 12/20/2016)
2017-01-10 27 Unopposed MOTION to Modify Dec. 20, 2016 Minute Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) (Entered: 01/10/2017)
2017-01-11 MINUTE ORDER granting 27 Motion to Modify. Defendant shall file its combined reply and cross-opposition by January 17, 2017, and plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by February 21, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/11/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/11/2017)
2017-01-17 28 Memorandum in opposition to re 21 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis MOTION to Appoint Counsel MOTION for Briefing Schedule MOTION to Permit Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment MOTION for Limited Admission filed by GINA MCCARTHY. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Supplemental Declaration of Kathryn Sargeant, # 3 Sargeant Supp. Decl. Exhs 1-4)(Truong, John) (Entered: 01/17/2017)
2017-01-17 29 NOTICE re 28 of Filing of Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Statement of Material Facts by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) Modified to add link on 1/18/2017 (znmw). (Entered: 01/17/2017)
2017-01-17 30 REPLY to opposition to motion re 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment (See ECF Nos. 28 and 29 for supporting documentations) filed by GINA MCCARTHY. (Truong, John) (Entered: 01/17/2017)
2017-01-26 31 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE as to ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. Attorney Adam Jeffrey White terminated. (White, Adam) (Entered: 01/26/2017)
2017-02-15 32 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 02/15/2017)
2017-02-16 MINUTE ORDER granting 32 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by March 31, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/16/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/16/2017)
2017-03-31 33 NOTICE OF ERRATA REGARDING THE DECLARATION OF JAMES R. CONDE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION AND CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. re 21 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis MOTION to Appoint Counsel MOTION for Briefing Schedule MOTION to Permit Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment MOTION for Limited Admission (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 03/31/2017)
2017-03-31 34 REPLY to opposition to motion re 21 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis MOTION to Appoint Counsel MOTION for Briefing Schedule MOTION to Permit Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment MOTION for Limited Admission filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Plaintiffs' Response to EPA's Second Statement of Material Facts as to Which There Are No Genuine Issues, # 2 Exhibits, # 3 Text of Proposed Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Surreply)(Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 03/31/2017)
2017-06-05 35 MOTION for Leave to File Sur-Reply by GINA MCCARTHY (Attachments: # 1 Sur-Reply Exh. 1)(Truong, John) (Entered: 06/05/2017)
2017-06-05 MINUTE ORDER granting 35 defendant's motion for leave to file sur-reply. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket defendant's 35 sur-reply. No further briefing from any party is required unless it is called for by the Court. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/5/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/05/2017)
2017-06-05 36 SURREPLY to re 21 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis MOTION to Appoint Counsel MOTION for Briefing Schedule MOTION to Permit Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment MOTION for Limited Admission filed by GINA MCCARTHY. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(td) (Entered: 06/06/2017)
2017-06-06 MINUTE ORDER. The parties have informed chambers of a dispute that has arisen in the context of this FOIA case, which may also implicate ethical rules, related to a potentially privileged document. If they cannot resolve the matter among themselves, the parties may each file submissions outlining their respective positions by June 9, 2017. The submissions may not exceed five pages, and the Court will call for responses or a hearing if it deems either to be necessary. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/6/17. (DMK) (Entered: 06/06/2017)
2017-06-06 Set/Reset Deadlines: Parties' submissions due by 6/9/2017. (kt) (Entered: 06/06/2017)
2017-06-09 37 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by GINA MCCARTHY (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Govt. Ex. 1)(Truong, John) (Entered: 06/09/2017)
2017-06-09 38 MOTION for "Claw Back" Inadvertently Disclosed Privileged Documents by GINA MCCARTHY (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of John C. Truong, # 2 Gov. Exh. 2, # 3 Gov. Exh. 3)(Truong, John) (Entered: 06/09/2017)
2017-06-09 39 RESPONSE re 38 MOTION for "Claw Back" Inadvertently Disclosed Privileged Documents filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 06/09/2017)
2017-06-12 MINUTE ORDER granting 37 Sealed Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal. The Clerk of Court is directed to file defendant's exhibit 1 [37-1] UNDER SEAL. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/12/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/12/2017)
2017-06-12 40 SEALED DOCUMENT filed by GINA MCCARTHY. re Order on Sealed Motion for Leave to File defendant's exhibit 1 [37-1] Document Under Seal. (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.)(ztd) (Entered: 06/12/2017)
2017-06-23 41 ORDER granting 38 defendant's motion for "claw back" of inadvertently disclosed privileged e-mail chain. It is hereby ORDERED that plaintiffs take the following steps: (1) destroy all copies of the inadvertently disclosed privileged documents, (2) make no use of the information contained in the April 19, 2017 email chain in this proceeding or otherwise, and (3) certify to the Court by July 5, 2017 that they have complied with this order. See Order for details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/23/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/23/2017)
2017-06-27 MINUTE ORDER. In order to assist the Court in making a responsible de novo determination, defendant is directed to deliver to chambers for in camera inspection, on or before July 11, 2017, a representative sample of documents it has withheld or redacted pursuant to Exemption 5. See Ray v. Turner, 587 F.2d 1187, 1195 (D.C. Cir. 1978). Defendant is ordered to provide the Court with five representative documents from each category identified in the declaration of James R. Conde, or all documents identified in the category if the category includes five or fewer documents. See Decl. of James R. Conde [Dkt. # 21-3] at 11-17. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/27/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/27/2017)
2017-07-05 42 RESPONSE TO ORDER OF THE COURT re 41 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief,,, Set/Reset Deadlines,, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH CLAW BACK ORDER filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 07/05/2017)
2017-07-05 43 MOTION to Modify the In Camera Review Order by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 07/05/2017)
2017-07-06 MINUTE ORDER granting 43 Motion to Modify. The Court encourages the parties to attempt to agree upon five representative documents in each category that contains more than five documents. However, if the parties cannot agree, then plaintiffs may identify three additional documents in each category. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 7/6/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 07/06/2017)
2017-07-11 44 NOTICE of Compliance of June 27, 2017 Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Truong, John) (Entered: 07/11/2017)
2017-08-29 MINUTE ORDER. After reviewing defendant's Vaughn Index, plaintiffs discovered that EPA had not produced "some email attachments as non-responsive." See Pls.' Statement of Facts [Dkt. # 21-2] para. 40. On December 21, 2016, defendant justified not producing these email attachments on the grounds that it considered the attachments and emails to be separate "records" for FOIA purposes. Ex. 3 to Sargeant Suppl. Decl. [Dkt. # 28-3]; Am. Immigration Lawyers Assn v. Exec. Office for Immigration Review, 830 F.3d 667, 677 (D.C. Cir. 2016) ("Under FOIA, agencies instead in effect define a 'record' when they undertake the process of identifying records that are responsive to a request."). But, the parties acknowledge that on December 21, 2016, defendant produced 180 non-responsive documents to plaintiffs. See Pls.' Cross-Reply [Dkt. # 34] at 4; Def.'s Sur-Reply [Dkt # 36]; Ex. 3 to Sargeant Suppl. Decl. [Dkt. # 28-3]. These documents are allegedly email attachments that are non-responsive to plaintiffs' FOIA request, but were attached to emails that are responsive to the request. In their cross-reply, plaintiffs still seek summary judgment on "all remaining email attachments redacted as non-responsive." Cross-Reply at 5. In its sur-reply, defendant does not address whether its December 21 production included all allegedly non-responsive email attachments or just a sub-set. See generally Def.'s Sur-Reply. Because the Court has an obligation to determine if a live controversy exists before it, defendant must inform the Court whether its production consisted of all allegedly non-responsive email attachments, making this portion of plaintiffs' motion moot, by September 1, 2017. See Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. FERC, 897 F.2d 570, 575 (D.C. Cir. 1990) ("A case is moot if events have so transpired that the decision will neither presently affect the parties' rights nor have a more-than-speculative change of affecting them in the future."). If the December production only included a sub-set of the set of email attachments originally not produced on the grounds that they were not responsive, defendant must provide a supplemental declaration stating the number of email attachments that have not been produced because they are non-responsive, and the basis for any differentiation between the attachments that were released and those that have not been produced. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 8/29/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 08/29/2017)
2017-09-01 45 RESPONSE TO ORDER OF THE COURT Response to the Court's August 29, 2017 Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) Modified event title on 9/5/2017 (znmw). (Entered: 09/01/2017)
2017-09-01 46 REPLY re 45 Response to Order of the Court re Minute Order Reply Concerning the Court's August 29, 2017 Minute Order filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) Modified to add link on 9/5/2017 (znmw). (Entered: 09/01/2017)
2017-09-01 MINUTE ORDER. Given defendant's stated intention to process any email attachments previously withheld as non-responsive, the agency has to produce any remaining documents, or identify an exemption justifying their withholding, by September 8, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/1/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/01/2017)
2017-09-07 47 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Court's September 1, 2017 Order by GINA MCCARTHY (Truong, John) (Entered: 09/07/2017)
2017-09-08 MINUTE ORDER granting 47 Motion for Extension of Time. Given defendant's stated intention to process any email attachments previously withheld as non-responsive, the agency has to produce any remaining documents, or identify an exemption justifying their withholding, by September 15, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/8/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/08/2017)
2017-09-15 48 RESPONSE TO ORDER OF THE COURT re Order on Motion for Extension of Time to,, Set/Reset Deadlines, filed by GINA MCCARTHY. (Attachments: # 1 Gov. Exh. A, # 2 Gov. Exh. B)(Truong, John) (Entered: 09/15/2017)
2017-09-20 49 REPLY re Order on Motion for Extension of Time to,, Set/Reset Deadlines, Reply Concerning the Court's September 8, 2017 Minute Order filed by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 09/20/2017)
2017-09-25 50 ORDER. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that defendant's 19 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, and plaintiffs' 21 cross-motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED. Because EPA's declaration does not describe an adequate search in response to plaintiffs' FOIA request, the matter is remanded to the agency to conduct a further search for responsive records, to provide a more detailed justification for the adequacy of the searches, and to release any reasonably segregable non-exempt material to plaintiffs consistent with FOIA. The parties shall file a joint status report by November 27, 2017, to update the Court on whether further proceedings are necessary in this matter. While the matter is on remand, the parties are ORDERED to meet and confer in an effort to respond to plaintiffs' contention that EPA "is still withholding 17 attachments that it erroneously claims to have previously released in full or in part." Resp. to Court's Order [Dkt. # 48] at 1. The agency is hereby ORDERED to produce any of the e-mail attachments it has yet to produce, and it must provide the Court with an updated declaration indicating that it has done so when it reports to the Court on the status of the renewed search. See Order for details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/25/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/25/2017)
2017-09-25 51 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/25/2017. (lcabj2) (Main Document 51 replaced on 9/25/2017) (zjth). (Entered: 09/25/2017)
2017-10-03 52 MOTION to Clarify the Court's September 25, 2017 Order by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 10/03/2017)
2017-10-04 MINUTE ORDER denying 52 Motion to Clarify. The Vaughn index prepared by defendant EPA revealed that the agency had withheld attachments to responsive emails, and it characterized those attachments in the index as "non-responsive." See Pls.' Statement of Facts [Dkt. # 21-2] para. 40. On December 21, 2016, defendant justified its failure to produce these email attachments with the explanation that it considered the attachments and emails to be separate "records" for FOIA purposes. Ex. 3 to Sargeant Suppl. Decl. [Dkt. # 28-3]. In the course of the summary judgment briefing, plaintiffs pressed their position that the records should be produced, see Pls.' Cross-Mem. [Dkt. # 21] at 27-28; Pls.' Cross-Reply [Dkt. # 34] at 20-22, but since defendant agreed to produce the material, see Def.'s Consent Mot. for Extension of Time [Dkt. # 47]; Resp. to Court's Order [Dkt. # 48], the Court ruled that the issue was moot. Mem. Op. [Dkt. # 51] at 11 n.6. Plaintiffs dedicated only one page of their combined memorandum to this issue, but they have since filed three additional submissions on the matter, including the instant motion. In the absence of a live controversy, there is no basis for the Court to issue an advisory opinion concerning the manner in which the records were originally labelled, and there is nothing ambiguous about the Court's order that the records be produced. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/4/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/04/2017)
2017-11-16 53 NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL by Kenneth A. Adebonojo on behalf of All Defendants Substituting for attorney John C. Truong (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 11/16/2017)
2017-11-27 54 Joint STATUS REPORT by Environmental Protection Agency and by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 11/27/2017)
2017-12-12 MINUTE ORDER. The parties shall file another joint status report by January 19, 2018. Defendant should proceed with the renewed search in accordance with the Court's 51 memorandum opinion. Defendant will be expected to justify any limits it imposes on the time period to be searched or the number of potential custodians conducting a search with the new terms when it is called upon to establish the adequacy of the search in the future. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/12/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/12/2017)
2017-12-12 Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Status Report due by 1/19/2018. (tg) (Entered: 12/12/2017)
2018-01-22 MINUTE ORDER. Defendant must produce responsive, non-exempt, non-CBI records on a rolling basis on February 16, 2018, March 16, 2018, and April 13, 2018, and it must file a status report concerning the status of the rolling productions on April 16, 2018. Defendant must produce records found not entitled to confidential treatment by July 6, 2018. And defendant must file a status report on August 3, 2018. Further, plaintiffs must file a status report indicating whether they are seeking any further action by the Court with respect to the 17 documents by February 9, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/22/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/22/2018)
2018-02-09 56 STATUS REPORT by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 02/09/2018)
2018-02-12 MINUTE ORDER. Defendant must file a status report in response to 56 plaintiffs' status report by February 16, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/12/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/12/2018)
2018-02-14 57 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Submit Status Report by GINA MCCARTHY (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 02/14/2018)
2018-02-15 MINUTE ORDER granting 57 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant must file a status report in response to 56 plaintiffs' status report by March 2, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/15/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/15/2018)
2018-03-05 58 STATUS REPORT by Defendant by GINA MCCARTHY. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit, # 7 Exhibit, # 8 Exhibit, # 9 Exhibit, # 10 Exhibit, # 11 Exhibit)(Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 03/05/2018)
2018-04-16 59 STATUS REPORT by GINA MCCARTHY. (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 04/16/2018)
2018-04-17 MINUTE ORDER. The parties must file a joint status report by May 1, 2018 informing the Court whether any further proceedings are necessary, and including a proposed schedule if necessary. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/17/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 04/17/2018)
2018-04-17 Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Status Report due by 5/1/2018 and proposed schedule if necessary. (tb) (Entered: 04/17/2018)
2018-05-01 60 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File the Parties' Joint Status Report by GINA MCCARTHY (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 05/01/2018)
2018-05-02 MINUTE ORDER granting 60 Motion for Extension of Time. The parties must file a joint status report by May 8, 2018 informing the Court whether any further proceedings are necessary, and including a proposed schedule if necessary. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 5/2/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 05/02/2018)
2018-05-08 61 Joint STATUS REPORT by GINA MCCARTHY. (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 05/08/2018)
2018-05-09 MINUTE ORDER. Defendant shall file its motion for summary judgment by August 13, 2018; plaintiffs shall file their opposition by September 13, 2018; and defendant shall file its reply by October 4, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 5/9/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 05/09/2018)
2018-08-13 62 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment by GINA MCCARTHY (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 08/13/2018)
2018-08-13 MINUTE ORDER granting 62 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall file its motion for summary judgment by September 28, 2018; plaintiffs shall file their opposition by October 29, 2018; and defendant shall file its reply by December 21, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 8/13/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 08/13/2018)
2018-09-28 MINUTE ORDER granting 63 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall file its motion for summary judgment by October 29, 2018; plaintiffs shall file their opposition by November 30, 2018; and defendant shall file its reply by December 21, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/28/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/28/2018)
2018-10-29 64 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment by GINA MCCARTHY (Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 10/29/2018)
2018-10-30 MINUTE ORDER granting 64 Motion for Extension of Time. Notwithstanding plaintiff's objection, which is noted, defendant must file its motion for summary judgment by November 30, 2018. Plaintiff's opposition must be filed by December 21, 2018, and defendant's reply must be filed by January 7, 2019. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/30/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/30/2018)
2018-12-03 MINUTE ORDER granting 65 Motion for Extension of Time. Notwithstanding plaintiff's objection, which is noted, defendant must file its motion for summary judgment by December 4, 2018. Plaintiff's opposition must be filed by December 28, 2018, and defendant's reply must be filed by January 11, 2019. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/3/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/03/2018)
2018-12-04 66 MOTION for Summary Judgment by GINA MCCARTHY (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Exhibit)(Adebonojo, Kenneth) (Entered: 12/04/2018)
2018-12-27 67 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 66 MOTION for Summary Judgment by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 12/27/2018)
2018-12-28 MINUTE ORDER granting 67 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiffs must file their opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment 66 by January 11, 2019. Defendant must file its reply by January 25, 2019. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/28/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/28/2018)
2019-01-10 68 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Plaintiffs' Opposition to Summary Judgment by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 01/10/2019)
2019-01-11 MINUTE ORDER granting 68 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiffs must file their opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment 66 by February 11, 2019. Defendant must file its reply by February 25, 2019. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/11/2019. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/11/2019)
2019-02-11 69 STIPULATION of Dismissal by ENERGY FUTURE COALITION, URBAN AIR INITIATIVE, INC.. (Gustafson, Adam) (Entered: 02/11/2019)
Hide Docket Events
by FOIA Project Staff
Text search and document storage provided by
Select Month July 2019 (6) June 2019 (6) May 2019 (10) April 2019 (10) March 2019 (6) February 2019 (8) January 2019 (12) December 2018 (7) November 2018 (11) October 2018 (11) September 2018 (6) August 2018 (14) July 2018 (6) June 2018 (11) May 2018 (8) April 2018 (8) March 2018 (10) February 2018 (8) January 2018 (13) December 2017 (8) November 2017 (6) October 2017 (8) September 2017 (11) August 2017 (10) July 2017 (9) June 2017 (11) May 2017 (12) April 2017 (8) March 2017 (10) February 2017 (8) January 2017 (10) December 2016 (10) November 2016 (10) October 2016 (9) September 2016 (8) August 2016 (9) July 2016 (10) June 2016 (11) May 2016 (9) April 2016 (11) March 2016 (11) February 2016 (9) January 2016 (12) December 2015 (6) November 2015 (9) October 2015 (8) September 2015 (9) August 2015 (11) July 2015 (8) June 2015 (10) May 2015 (9) April 2015 (11) March 2015 (12) February 2015 (9) January 2015 (6) December 2014 (7) November 2014 (8) October 2014 (7) September 2014 (10) August 2014 (9) July 2014 (6) June 2014 (8) May 2014 (7) April 2014 (9) March 2014 (8) February 2014 (8) January 2014 (7) December 2013 (6) November 2013 (7) October 2013 (12) September 2013 (8) August 2013 (8) July 2013 (11) June 2013 (7) May 2013 (5) April 2013 (8) March 2013 (7) February 2013 (4) January 2013 (5) December 2012 (6) November 2012 (4) October 2012 (5) September 2012 (4) August 2012 (5) July 2012 (4) June 2012 (4) May 2012 (7) April 2012 (4) March 2012 (6) February 2012 (4) January 2012 (5) December 2011 (4) November 2011 (5) October 2011 (4) September 2011 (4) August 2011 (5) July 2011 (4) June 2011 (4) May 2011 (5) April 2011 (4) March 2011 (4) February 2011 (5) January 2011 (5) December 2010 (3) November 2010 (5) October 2010 (3) September 2010 (4) August 2010 (4) July 2010 (3) June 2010 (5) May 2010 (7)


Seeking the best soft cosmetic bags with good quality and affordable prices from DHgate NZ site. We provide a variety of cheap cosmetic product bags supplied by reliable sellers around the world. Helping you on your way to finding cheap cosmetics bags online of satisfaction is what we aim for. Enjoy exploring diverse arrays of floral cosmetic bags sale and shop ideal wholesale roll up cosmetic bags from nz.dhgate.com with free delivery to New Zealand.


This apartment has frontal sea views and views of the Plaza of La Mata with all its charm. 2 bedrooms, bathroom, hall, kitchen and a large living room with a terrace of about 6 square meters. The Plaza and the sea are right in front of the building with all its charm. The shops of Plaza de la Mata invite you to have a drink or simply enjoy the great beach of La Mata. There is a bus stop nearby and all kinds of shops such as a supermarket, bars, restaurants, a pharmacy and a bakery. In the early evening there is a small market on the square, which invites you to walk and linger. The apartment serves as a holiday residence and also for permanent living in La Mata.


People planning to fly during the Thanksgiving or Christmas holiday should book their flights soon or face paying steeper prices or losing out on seats, according to travel experts.
Experts warn prices for tickets during the holidays will start increasing by $200 to $300 in the next few weeks.
?It?s always cheaper to book your tickets at least 21 days out. As the airlines fills up their inventory of seats, and the closer you get to your departure date, the remaining seats the airlines have available are usually priced higher,? Dayton International Airport Director Terry Slaybaugh said.
It?s not just higher prices procrastinating travelers need to worry about, it?s space on the planes.
?We had a pretty dramatic decrease in seats this summer. We were down 15,000 seats a month. We are not going to get those seats back until probably a year from now. There will be fewer seats this winter than what we were able to offer people a year ago,? Slaybaugh said.
AAA?s director of leisure travel Micki Dudas agrees that the time to book is as early as possible.
?Many travelers think that if they wait to book, they may snag a last minute deal from an airline. That may have been true in the past, but it?s not realistic anymore,? Dudas said.
Frequent flier Mike Kelly, who books his flights online, said he missed a good deal on a business trip by waiting too long.
?I saw a 25-30 percent increase when I booked a flight that I am going to be taking in two weeks. If I had gone ahead and booked just one week prior, I would have saved quite a bit of money,? Kelly said.
He said his experience shows booking early gets the cheapest ticket price.
?At least a minimum two weeks out, but I recommend a month, even two months in advance, to get the best deals,? Kelly said.


This research aims to explore factors influencing zakat payers' preference in discharging their zakat obligations (i.e. paying zakat through authorized zakat institutions or giving it directly to recipients). This research was inspired by one of findings of our research on the effectiveness of zakat community development (ZCD) in Tanah Datar District. More clearly, ineffectiveness of the ZCD program undertaken was due to among others insufficient funding. This result indicates that local BAZNAS as the authorized zakat institution operated locally has not been able yet to optimize collection of zakat funds from zakat payers. This research is explorative in nature and therefore adopts a qualitative research approach. Data was collected at the end of October 2018, using Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with participants were two groups of postgraduate students majoring in Sharia Accounting and Sharia Banking at the State Islamic Institute Batusangkar. This research concludes that zakat payers' preference in discharging their zakat obligations is influenced by factors such as zakat awareness, tradition, trust and level of income. This is the first research undertaken to explore the behavior of zakat payers in Indonesia. The result theoretical framework proposed in this study can be empirically tested in a larger population by the future research.
Afzalurrahman, (1982). Muhammad As A Trader. London: The Muslim School Trust.
Firdaus, M., Beik, S.I., Irawan, T., & Juanda, B. (2012). Economic Estimation and Determinations of Zakat Potential in Indonesia. Working Paper 1433-07. Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI).
Matthews, B., & Ross, L. (2010). Research Methods: a Practical Guide for the Social Sciences. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Naser, K., Murinde, V. & Al-Utaibi, A. (2001). Accounting for Zakat: Evidence on Zakat Payment, Collection and Distribution in GCC Countries, Accounting, Commerce and Finance: The Islamic Perspective Journal, 5(1): 25-65.
Sabiq, S. (2004). Fiqih Sunnah. Jakarta: Pena Pundi Aksara.
Shiddieqy, M.H.A.T. (1987). Pedoman Zakat. Semarang: PT. Pustaka Rizki Putra.


text:
Division Design | terms of business
Division Design is a fresh, energetic graphic & website design company based in Northwich, Cheshire with a wealth of experience, skills and ideas to create inspiring and individual marketing material for your business.
cheshire, graphic design, website design, northwich, wordpress designer, shopify designer, logo design, brochure design, print, exhibition, posters, business card design, branding, newsletter design, catalogue design
page-template-default,page,page-id-17542,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-child-theme-ver-1.0.0,qode-theme-ver-10.1.2,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.4.4,vc_responsive
This document sets out the terms and conditions between your business and Division Design Limited (herein called "Division Design") and forms an integral part of any existing and future proposal or other written document or communication between your business and Division Design. The primary purpose of these terms and conditions is to minimise any potential misunderstandings and to clearly state the design and build phases of each project and set out the timings as to when stage payments are due.
Division Design's office hours are 9.00am – 5.30pm, Monday to Friday. Telephone calls received out of hours will be diverted to our answering machine and dealt with on the next working day. Where staff mobile telephone numbers are provided, we ask that you exercise discretion when calling out of hours and only call in emergencies, as in some cases these are also the staff's personal telephones. We appreciate your understanding.
Provision of Materials
You agree to provide us with the specific copy, images and information we require in order to create your product, or to advise us as to where we can locate such materials. We accept no responsibility for your site not being put live/product being completed by a specific date if we are unable to secure necessary and/or suitable information and/or materials from you. If you cannot supply the information you wish to feature in your product, we will do what we can to obtain it, but we accept no responsibility for errors, omissions or discrepancies which may be present on the final product, as these may arise through our lack of specialist knowledge regarding the content of your product. The time taken to compile the data, as well as any time required to correct errors, omissions or discrepancies which have arisen through your not providing us with adequate materials, will be charged to you at our standard rate. We accept no responsibility for the delay caused in providing you with the final product as a result of your supplying us with insufficient or unsuitable materials. This does not apply if the additional cost could have been avoided but for unreasonable delay on the part of Division Design in ascertaining the unsuitability of the materials with which you provide us. Where you supply or specify materials, we will take every care to secure the best results in the finished product, but we accept no responsibility for imperfect work caused by defects in or unsuitability of materials so supplied or specified.
Print Proof Agreement
Your approval of a final proof (printed or electronic) confirms that you agree to the design and contents of the document as depicted on the proof. By approving, you absolve Division Design of all liability for any errors, omissions or discrepancies which may be present on the proof. Once you have approved this work, you are not able to make any changes to the final product, nor are you able to hold Division Design responsible for anything you are unhappy with. This contract revokes your right to take any kind of action against Division Design for any aspect of the work with which you are later dissatisfied. Signing this contract means that, as long as the finished product is as discussed with the sales representative and consistent with the proof if supplied, you must pay in full for the work. This fact applies whether or not you later take issue with any aspect of the product. These terms are final and non-negotiable. This is your final opportunity to make changes to the content.
Making Changes After Proof Stage (Print Only)
If a change is requested, we will do everything we can to make the correction before the printing starts, but we cannot guarantee this. We accept no responsibility, under any circumstances, for any mistakes present on the completed work, as the signing-off of a proof absolves us of all liability (see "Proof Agreement" above). Once the proof is signed off or agreed, whether verbally or via email, we incur a film / plate(s) charge and this is passed on to you as part of the total charge (see "Price Breakdown"). Any changes made after a proof is signed off will result in a further charge.
Print Quality (Print Only)
Every effort will be made to obtain the best possible colour reproduction on customer's work but because of the nature of the processes involved, Division Design cannot guarantee an exact match in colour or texture between any materials with which you supply us, and the printed article.
Quantity Supplied (Print Only)
Every effort is made to produce the exact quantity of items ordered. However, some variation is inherent in the print process and so you accept that minor variations in quantity are possible. These do not affect the price charged.
Claims (Print Only)
Advice of damage, delay or partial loss of goods in transit or of non-delivery must be given in writing to Division Design within three clear days of delivery (or, in the case of non-delivery, within 28 days of dispatch of the goods) and any claim in respect thereof must be made in writing to Division Design and the carrier within seven clear days of delivery (or, in the case of non-delivery, within 42 days of dispatch). All other claims must be made in writing to Division Design within 28 days of delivery. Division Design shall not be liable in respect of any claim unless the aforementioned requirements have been complied with except in any particular case where the customer proves that (i) it was not possible to comply with the requirements and (ii) advice (where required) was given and the claim made as soon as reasonably possible.
Standing Material (Print Only)
All materials (including but not limited to film, plates, negatives and positives) produced and used by Division Design during the production process remain the property of Division Design. Where these materials are provided by the client, they remain the property of the client. Division Design reserves the right to dispose of lithographic work immediately after the order is executed unless written arrangements are made to the contrary. In the latter event, rent may be charged for the safe-keeping of the materials.
Payment Terms (Print)
New customers agree to pay a deposit of 40% of the final bill upon ordering, and to pay the outstanding balance on delivery of the completed work. Existing customers agree to adhere to the terms stated on the invoice. All deposit payments are non-refundable.
Website Updates & Site Maintenance
These are charged at £60 per hour (or part thereof). If you want to introduce new material in the form of extra pages, additional functions, or more information than is already available on your site, this must be paid for as a new job.
Website Proofs
Once a client has agreed a look and feel proof and instructed Division Design to proceed to build, any subsequent changes in style or design requested by the client will be charged for at the appropriate hourly rate.
Exceptions (Web)
We accept that certain details regarding your business, such as telephone numbers and email addresses, sometimes change, and that the details placed in a proof are liable to change. To this end we will amend smaller details such as these as part of our construction package. This policy applies throughout your contract with Division Design: if a minor detail needs to be amended, we are more than happy to do so, free of charge. Larger changes, such as the creation of a new page or introduction of a new feature on your site, or the sourcing / changing of images are not covered by this policy and must be paid for.
Unless negotiated and agreed in writing, the copyrights of general artwork, commissioned artwork, illustrations, website design, programming and copy belong to Division Design. If you supply us with material, it is your responsibility to obtain all necessary copyrights for its use, and we assume that you possess these. In such cases, the copyright belongs to you. By signing this agreement, you agree to indemnify Division Design from any claim which arises regarding the use of material with which you supply us. We reserve the right to use any artwork or printing we produce for the purposes of promoting our services unless you request otherwise in writing. Copyright is retained by Division Design on all design work including words, pictures, ideas, visuals and illustrations unless specifically released in writing and after all costs have been settled.
Where Division Design obtain the rights to use images sourced from a commercial image library, neither the client or Division Design has any legal ownership of the image(s). Any charges made for the supply of images are purely for the sourcing and use of those images by Division Design. Because of copyright laws we are unable to supply these images to third parties for any other use.
All quotes for work are valid for thirty (30) days, after which time all proposed work will have to be re-quoted. We take no responsibility for a re-quoted price differing from an original quote.
Illegal Matter
Division Design reserves the right not to print any matter deemed illegal, libellous or offensive, or which may be an infringement of the proprietary or other rights of any third party. This agreement indemnifies us in respect of any claims, costs and expenses arising out of any libellous matter or any infringement of copyright, patent, design or of any other proprietary or personal rights contained in any material printed for the customer. The indemnity shall extend to any amounts paid on a lawyer's advice in settlement of any claim.
Division Design accept no liability whatsoever for consequential or third party losses, resulting in a delay in delivery howsoever caused.
Division Design accept no liability whatsoever for financial loss or loss of earnings arising from products or services provided by Division Design.
Division Design accept no responsibility if we are unable to carry out any provision of the contract for any reason beyond our control including (without limiting the foregoing) Act of God, legislation, war, fire, flood, drought, failure of power supply, lock-out, strike or other action taken by employees in contemplation or furtherance of a dispute or owing to any inability to procure materials required for the performance of the contract. During the continuance of such a contingency you may, by written notice to ourselves, elect to terminate the contract and pay for work done and materials used, but subject thereto shall otherwise accept delivery when available.
Division Design shall not be liable for any loss to the customer arising from delay in transit caused by circumstances beyond Division Design's control.
The invoice we send you will be itemised, showing the cost of the design and research process, as well as the production itself. Supplying us with suitable material will, therefore, reduce the time spent on design and, thereby, the final charge. VAT is charged at the current Customs & Excise rates and according to current regulations, irrespective of whether or not it is included in a price quotation.
Jobs Put On Hold or Cancelled by the Client
Jobs put on hold or cancelled by the client during production will be invoiced at current stage and materials. This invoice must be paid in full together with any VAT that falls due accordingly.
For invoices not settled within the agreed credit terms, we reserve the right to charge interest on the overdue debt at 2% above the Barclays base rate at the time and an administration fee to cover the debt recovery costs.
Any customer ceasing to pay their debts in the ordinary course of business or proving unable to pay their debts as they become due or, being, a company, is deemed to be unable to pay its debts, or has a winding-up petition issued against it or, being a person, commits an act of bankruptcy or has a bankruptcy petition issued against it, Division Design, without prejudice to other remedies, shall (i) have the right not to proceed further with the contract or any other work for the customer and be entitled to charge for work already carried out (whether completed or not) and materials purchased for the customer, such charge to be an immediate debt due to it, and (ii) in respect of all unpaid debts due from the customer, have a general lien on all goods and property in its possession (whether worked on or not) and shall be entitled on the expiration of 14 days' notice to dispose of such goods or property in such manner and at such price as we think fit and to apply the proceeds towards such debts.
Division Design agrees keep the confidential information of its clients confidential, including all administration areas of websites and details of referrers and those who are referred. All such data recorded by a website will be completely secure, and all information will be treated as confidential in accordance with the Data Protection Act.
Division Design Limited
/ contact division.
Division Design Ltd
The Tank Shed, Cuddington Lane
Cuddington, Cheshire CW8 2SZ
Email: mike@divisiondesign.co.uk
/ recent tweets.
Otto the new office dog seems to be settling in to his first day at work. 🐕#wirehairedvizsla pic.twitter.com/IZMS…
About 2 years ago from Division Design's Twitter via Twitter Web Client
New corporate website designed and built for @BakerMallett bakermallett.com #Webdesign #Northwich #Cheshire
You're welcome, a real pleasure to work on and we're delighted with the results! twitter.com/BakerMal…
Congratulations to our client @wearecusecure on making the @elecawards 'Innovative Industrial Product of the Year' Finals. Good Luck! twitter.com/wearecus…
Working on the designs for @dexterandjones - a new craft #beer and artisan #gin bottle shop opening in #Knutsford soon...
About 3 years ago from Division Design's Twitter via Twitter for iPhone
New website launched today for Plumley based @VisitPlantation (near Knutsford). divisiondesign.co.uk… pic.twitter.com/ZjUE…
Delighted to have produced the rather stylish new website visitplantation.co.u… for @VisitPlantation twitter.com/VisitPla…
Need a new fully responsive website for your business? Get in touch with Division Design today divisiondesign.co.uk #Northwich #Design
Northwich Web & Graphic Design Company with a wealth of experience to create inspiring & individual marketing material for your business.
20 Things You Should Never Say to a Graphic Designer - But Probably Do designschool.canva.c…
Follow @divisiondesign
/ latest news.
We've Been Officially Recommended! 22nd May 2015
Shopify eCommerce Partner 23rd April 2015
Google to penalise non mobile websites 29th March 2015
/ let's talk.
We'd love the opportunity to discuss your next project with you, so please call us on 01606 888252 for an informal discussion or to arrange a meeting.
© Copyright 2007-2018 Division Design Ltd | All rights reserved | Terms & Conditions


Spec's downtown on Smith is always busy on a Friday afternoon with patrons arming themselves with enough adult drinks to make it through the weekend.
Today was extra special. Booths were lined up out front and employees had on special Spec's Cheese and Wine Festival T-shirts.
Except Spec's had a real party pooper of a sign out front, announcing it wasn't pouring any wine.
"Attention Customers. Wine tastings have been Postponed until further notice. But enjoy all our food samples, hourly drawings and do not forget to register to win a gift basket!" the hand-written sign on wipe board read.
Inside the store, servers were valiantly pushing piles of cheese at customers. One server, astutely recognizing the less-than-thrilled reaction, called out that he had "appetizers! And hey, they're not cheese!"
Asked why no wine, two employees in different parts of the store gave completely different answers.
Toward the front of the store, another employee denied that the Washington dust-up had anything to do with it. He said it was because Spec's was tired of getting complaints from customers about some of the wine pourers they'd brought in -- Spec's isn't allowed to pour itself under state liquor laws -- and while they were working up new procedures, they decided to do without. "They say they're rude," he detailed.
Look for cheese to go on sale at Spec's in the next week or so. They're probably not going to have much of a crowd for it tonight.
And if you can snag one of those orangey-yellow cheese/wine festival T-shirts, do so. They have collectable written all over them.


TORONTO, ONTARIO–(Marketwire - Oct. 26, 2011) - Lundin Mining Corporation (TSX:LUN)(OMX:LUMI) ("Lundin Mining" or the "Company") today reported net income of $12.4 million ($0.02 per share) for the third quarter of 2011 and year-to-date net income of $141.3 million ($0.24 per share).
Paul Conibear, President and CEO commented, "At Neves-Corvo, mining and milling volumes continued at high levels, but lower overall grades in the quarter resulted in reduced metal production and consequently higher cash costs on a per pound basis. These higher costs as well as declining metal prices significantly impacted our operating earnings. During late September we moved into higher grade stopes and this contributed to improved production compared to the previous period. Significant increases in production are expected in the fourth quarter as we continue mining in high grade areas.
Zinkgruvan incurred operating issues with both its zinc and copper grinding mills which affected production. The copper mill gearbox was repaired and was back on line in September and a zinc mill vibration issue is expected to be resolved by the end of October to get back up to full production.
2 Operating earnings is a non-IFRS measure defined as sales, less operating costs and general and administration costs.
Copper and zinc production improved over the previous quarter; however, production at both Neves-Corvo and Zinkgruvan was curtailed due to a number of issues. We continued to mine low grade stockwork ores at Neves-Corvo and consequently plant recoveries were lower than planned. At Zinkgruvan, production shortfalls were experienced due to grinding mill related issues in both circuits. Action has been taken to resolve these issues to enhance fourth quarter production.
Operating earnings1 for the current quarter of $48.7 million was lower than the $121.5 million reported in the third quarter of 2010. Unfavourable price and price adjustments ($22.9 million effect), lower volume ($11.4 million effect), higher per unit costs ($18.7 million effect), suspension of mining activities at Aguablanca ($19.2 million effect) and foreign exchange ($7.6 million effect) all contributed to the negative variance.
Net income of $12.4 million ($0.02 per share) was $53.6 million lower than the $66.0 million ($0.11 per share) reported for the third quarter of 2010. The decrease was largely the result of lower operating earnings ($72.8 million), losses on marketable securities of $11.8 million and an unfavourable tax assessment in Spain for the 2004 to 2006 taxation years ($12.5 million tax plus $2.7 million interest). This was partially offset by foreign exchange gains of $36.5 million.
Cash flow from operations, before changes in non-cash working capital items, for the current quarter was an inflow of $23.7 million, compared to an inflow of $94.2 million for the corresponding period in 2010. The decrease of $70.5 million relates mainly to lower earnings. Cash flow from operations does not include cash flow related to Tenke. During the quarter, our share of available cash from Tenke contributed to a $32.0 million final repayment, discharging the Excess Overrun Cost ("EOC") facility for the completed Phase 1 project, and we received an additional $7.8 million cash distribution.
The Neves-Corvo Zinc Expansion plant was started up on time and on budget in July. Given the continued high ratio between copper and zinc price, in August this new circuit was converted to copper ore processing and the Company plans to run the new circuit on copper ore until year-end to achieve higher margins.
In August, a new mine contractor was mobilized to the Aguablanca nickel/copper mine to commence pit push-backs and reinstatement of the pit haul ramp. The restart of Aguablanca concentrate production remains on schedule for the third quarter of 2012. An underground mining study was also initiated, intended to define potential high grade underground feed to supplement open pit production.
In September, the Company released the results of a Feasibility Study on the Lombador Phase I development demonstrating that the exploitation of the upper portions of the Lombador zinc/copper ore bodies could extend the mine life to at least 2026 and create a platform for further extensions. The optimal development plan for Lombador is being examined further in conjunction with assessing exploitation concepts for the Semblana copper discovery. The Company has initiated the Neves-Corvo Future Underground Materials Handling Study to assess medium and long-term underground deposit access and extraction infrastructure, including potential benefits of a second deeper shaft.
During the quarter, the analysis of an extensive 3D seismic geophysics survey across the Neves-Corvo concessions yielded the identification of 19 new drill targets all within the depth horizon of existing mine workings, and at similar elevations to Semblana and Lombador. Exploration budgets were increased and these targets will be progressively tested over the year ahead.
Exploration programs on the Company's own assets are being increased in response to drilling success at all current programs including our Irish exploration projects.
1 Operating earnings is a non-IFRS measure defined as sales, less operating costs and general and administration costs.
For the quarter ended September 30, 2011, Tenke production was 32,249 tonnes of copper; 29,702 tonnes of copper were sold at an average realized price of $3.46 per pound.
Received its first cash return of $7.8 million.
The Phase 2 Expansion feasibility study to optimize the current plant and increase capacity has been completed under the direction of the operator, Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. ("FCX" or "Freeport"). FCX plans to expand the mill rate to 14,000 tonnes per day through the investment of approximately $850 million (Lundin Mining's share approximately $250 million). The expansion includes the completion of mill upgrades, acquisition of additional mining equipment, construction of a new tankhouse and a sulfuric acid plant expansion all targeted for completion in 2013. The Phase 2 Expansion is expected to take total plant production of copper cathode up to approximately 195,000 tpa. Early works on this expansion, funded by the partners and from excess cash flow from operations, continued on site during the quarter.
Net cash(1) at September 30, 2011 was $208.7 million compared to $125.7 million at September 30, 2010 and $308.2 million at June 30, 2011.
The decrease in net cash during the quarter is primarily attributable to income tax payments ($57.5 million), royalty payments ($18.6 million), investment in mineral property, plant and equipment ($35.1 million), the acquisition of Belmore Resources (Holdings) plc ($9.5 million) and net investment costs in Tenke Fungurume expansion and sustaining capital works ($6.4 million).
Cash on hand at September 30, 2011 was $256.2 million.
Overall production targets for 2011 remain largely unchanged from previous guidance; however, we have slightly lowered copper and lead production guidance to be conservative on year-end expectations. C1 cash costs have been updated for forecast production adjustments and changes in forecast metal prices and the US dollar exchange rates with European currencies.
1 Cash costs remain dependent upon exchange rates (2011 revised forecast €/USD: 1.35 – USD/SEK: 6.80; previous forecast €/USD: 1.40 –USD/SEK: 6.40).
2 Cash cost is a Non-IFRS measure reflecting the sum of direct costs and inventory changes less by-product credits.
3 As provided in the MD&A for the six months ended June 30, 2011, dated July 29, 2011.
Neves-Corvo: Although new massive sulphide stopes have been producing high grade feed to the plant since late September (approximately 4% copper feed grades), production guidance for Neves-Corvo has been revised slightly downwards to reflect a conservative estimate of copper production to year-end. Zinc production guidance at Neves-Corvo has also been reduced as the new zinc plant was converted to copper production duty shortly after startup.
Cash cost of copper is expected to increase by $0.15/lb over previous guidance due to higher production costs and lower than expected by-product credits. As a result of these changes, C1 cost guidance for the year is increased from $1.65/lb to $1.80/lb copper.
Zinkgruvan: Annual zinc production guidance is being lowered by 2,000 tonnes as a result of a precautionary reduction in throughput due to the increase in vibrations in the mill girth gear. The mill will be offline for nine days in October 2011 while the girth gear is being re-set, after which the mill throughput is expected to increase back to its planned rate. By-product lead production is consequently expected to be 2,000 tonnes lower than last guidance figures.
During the third quarter, the relatively new copper circuit grinding mill gear box failed and down-time has resulted in reduced copper production expectations for the year. The repaired gear box is now in place but copper production guidance has been lowered to 1,500 tonnes for the year to account for the schedule disruption.
Cash cost of zinc is expected to increase from $0.21/lb to $0.32/lb partly due to lower production noted above. In addition, by-product credits are expected to be lower as a result of the recent decline in metal prices and lower copper/lead production.
Aguablanca: The new mining contractor has started pre-stripping operations. First concentrate production continues to be on schedule for the third quarter of 2012.
Guidance on timing and total investment of €40 million to re-commence ore production is maintained.
Galmoy: The mine closure plan has been approved by the authorities. Zinc and lead production continue to exceed targets and thus zinc annual guidance has been increased to 31,000 tonnes.
Tenke: Copper production guidance has been maintained; however, as reported by Freeport, the cash cost guidance is increased to $1.03/lb copper based on expected sales volumes and cost estimates, assuming an average cobalt price of $14/lb for the fourth quarter of 2011.
1 Net cash is a Non-IFRS measure defined as available unrestricted cash less financial debt, including capital leases and other debt-related obligations.
Total capital expenditure for the year is expected to be approximately $290 million, unchanged from the initial guidance outlined in the Company's MD&A for the three months ended March 31, 2011. The $120 million of capital expenditures for Tenke is being funded by a combination of cash calls and profits generated by the mine.
The copper production profile of Neves-Corvo declines from previous years due predominantly to remaining reserves being lower grade stockworks (< 3% Cu), which also provide for less predictable ore characteristics and lower plant recoveries. Consequently mine planning methods are being revised and a more conservative approach has been taken for preliminary 2012 production guidance. Zinc production for the year ahead is expected to be at least 30,000 tonnes.
Although Zinkgruvan production for the year ahead is expected to see modest increases in all metals, it will be substantially the same as the current year with some upside potential depending on success in plant debottlenecking.
Aguablanca forecasts contemplate the mine restarting concentrate production in the third quarter of 2012 and ramping up by year-end.
Galmoy high grade mining is expected to conclude in the first half of the year.
Tenke production guidance is not available pending Freeport providing its company-wide annual forecast.
Production optimization for 2012 along with five year planning will occur over the next two months. 2012 metal production guidance is expected to be updated in December following Board approval of budgets.
Aguablanca Ni 500 – 1,000 n.a.
Cu 500 – 1,000 n.a.
Ni 500 – 1,000 n.a.
1 Metal sales are dependent upon milling at a third party processing facility, which are expected to approximate 12,000t Zn and 3,000t Pb in 2012.
2 Tenke 2012 Guidance has not yet been provided by Operator FCX. Lundin Mining anticipates production from Tenke in 2012 to be greater than 2011 guidance subject to the possibilities of staged startup of Phase 2 expansion initiatives.
The Q3 2011 unaudited financial statements and management's discussion and analysis are available on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) or the Company's website (www.lundinmining.com).
1 Operating earnings is a Non-IFRS measure defined as sales, less operating costs and general and administrative costs.
2 Net cash (debt) is a Non-IFRS measure defined as available unrestricted cash less financial debt, including capital leases and other debt-related obligations.
3 Shareholders' equity per share is a Non-IFRS measure defined as shareholders' equity divided by total number of shares outstanding at the end of the period.
4 Equity ratio is a Non-IFRS measure defined as shareholders' equity divided by total assets at the end of the period.
5 Conversion to IFRS on January 1, 2011 requires the completion of IFRS compliant financial statements on a comparative basis for 2010. Financial results prior to 2010 remain unchanged and are reported in accordance with Canadian GAAP.
6 Income per share is determined for each quarter. As a result of using a different weighted average number of shares outstanding, the sum of the quarterly amounts may differ from the year-to-date amount.


The biggest challenge has been to make visible the three-dimensionality through a few elements with strong shades on a translucent material. The key has been the interaction between the graphic and the material element, supported by the light, able to describe reflections capable of extending spatial perception. We recreated the charm of a contemporary architecture that was born from the symbiotic connection between surfaces and colors with the wood's natural texture. The contrast arises from the combination of strong colors with the wood's matter to suggest new forms of architecture, as if we were poolside, in a rationalist villa.