Settlement Agreement Between
` the United States of America
` and
` the Florida State Courts System
`
` This matter was initiated by a complaint filed under title II of the
`(cid:31) (cid:31)
`Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. 12131-12134, with the
`United States Department of Justice (hereinafter "the Department") against the
`Twentieth Judicial Circuit of Florida, which is part of the Florida State
`Courts System. The complaint was filed with the Civil Rights Division of the
`Department of Justice, under the authority of 28 C.F.R. Part 35, Subpart F.
`The complainant, who is hard of hearing and who is a defendant in an eminent
`domain proceeding, alleged that the Twentieth Judicial Circuit discriminated
`against her on the basis of her disability by failing to take the appropriate
`steps to ensure that the communication with her during the August 1993
`proceedings was as effective as communication with others. She also alleged
`that the transcription equipment that the Twentieth Judicial Circuit provided
`was ineffective in providing her access to what was being said at her
`three-day trial because of confusing and distracting information being
`displayed on the screen. She further alleged that even though she had filed a
`grievance against the usage of such technology, the same technology was used
`at a later hearing in April 1994.
`
` The Department of Justice is authorized under 28 C.F.R. Part 35,
`Subpart F, to investigate the allegations of the complaint in this matter, to
`determine the compliance of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit with title II of
`the ADA and the Department's implementing regulation, issue findings, and,
`where appropriate, negotiate and secure voluntary compliance agreements.
`(cid:31)
`Furthermore, the Attorney General is authorized under 42 U.S.C. 12133 to
`bring a civil action enforcing title II of the ADA should the Department fail
`to secure voluntary compliance pursuant to subpart F.
`
` The parties to this Agreement are the United States of America and the
`Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Florida as chief administrative officer
`(cid:31)
`of the judicial branch (Art. V, 2, Fla. Const.) (hereinafter "Chief
`Justice"). In consideration of the terms of this Agreement as set forth below,
`the Attorney General agrees to refrain from undertaking further investigation
`or from filing a civil suit in this matter.
`
` Pursuant to the provision of the ADA entitled "Alternative Means of
`(cid:31)
`Dispute Resolution," 42 U.S.C. 12212, the parties have entered into this
`Agreement. In order to secure compliance by voluntary means, the parties
`hereby agree as follows:
`
`01-04814
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 1 of 8
`
`

`

` 1. The Chief Justice does not admit by the signing of this Agreement
`that the Florida State Courts System's current policies and practices are in
`violation in any respect with the ADA or its implementing regulation.
`
` 2. The ADA applies to the Florida State Courts System because it is
`(cid:31)
`a public entity as defined in 42 U.S.C. 12131 and the Department of
`(cid:31)
`Justice's regulation implementing title II, 28 C.F.R. 35.104.
`
` 3. The purpose of the Settlement Agreement is to ensure that persons
`who are deaf or hard of hearing have an equal opportunity to benefit from the
`programs and services of the Florida State Courts System.
`
` 4. The Florida State Courts System has established, and will
`continue to maintain, a written policy, which requires that all Florida courts
`ensure that real-time transcription services used in court proceedings be
`accurate in order to ensure effective participation by a party, witness,
`attorney, judicial employee, judge, or juror who is deaf or hard of hearing.
`The policy states that in order to ensure complete accuracy of real-time
`transcription, the Florida courts must comply with the minimum guidelines as
`set forth in the policy.
`
` 5. Beginning on the effective date of this Agreement, all
`appropriate state court officials responsible for conducting proceedings will
`be instructed to comply with the provisions of this Agreement.
`
` 6. The Florida Supreme Court, through its administrative arm, the
`Office of the State Courts Administrator, will:
`
` a. distribute notice of the Agreement and policy to all
` Florida judges and trial court administrators within 30
` days of the effective date; and
`
` b. schedule and conduct training for chief judges and trial
` court administrators on the practical application of the
` ADA and this Agreement in jury trials and other court
` proceedings, at their next regularly scheduled meetings.
`
` 7. The Department of Justice may review compliance with this
`Agreement at any time. If it determines that this Agreement or any requirement
`thereof has been violated, it may institute a civil action seeking specific
`performance of the provisions of this Agreement in an appropriate Federal
`court.
`
` 8. Failure by the Department of Justice to enforce this entire
`Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other
`provision herein
`
` Page 2
`01-04815
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 2 of 8
`
`

`

`will not be construed as a waiver of the Department's right to enforce other
`deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.
`
` 9. This Agreement is a public document. A copy of this document or
`any information contained in it may be made available to any person. The
`Office of the State Courts Administrator will provide a copy of this Agreement
`to any person upon request.
`
` 10. In the event that the Florida State Courts System fails to comply
`in a timely manner with any requirement of this Agreement without obtaining
`sufficient advance written agreement with the Department as a temporary
`modification of the relevant terms of this Agreement, all terms of this
`Agreement will become enforceable in an appropriate Federal court.
`
` 11. The effective date of this Agreement is the date of the last
`signature below.
`
` 12. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
`parties on the matters raised herein, and no other statement, promise, or
`agreement, either written or oral, made by either party or agents of either
`party, that is not contained in this written Agreement, will be enforceable.
`This Agreement is limited to the facts set forth in the first paragraph, and
`it does not purport to remedy any other potential violations of the ADA or any
`other Federal law. This Agreement does not affect the continuing
`responsibility of the Florida State Courts System, or the Twentieth Judicial
`Circuit, to comply with all aspects of the ADA.
`
`For the Florida State Courts System: For the United States of America:
`
`
`(Signature) (Signature) Robert Mather
`_________________________________ _____________________________
`STEPHEN H. GRIMES, Chief Justice JOHN L. WODATCH, Chief
`as chief administrative officer and on L. IRENE BOWEN, Deputy Chief
`behalf of the Florida State Courts System ROBERT J. MATHER, Attorney
`Supreme Court of Florida Disability Rights Section
`500 South Duval Street Civil Rights Division
`Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1925 U.S. Department of Justice
` P.O. Box 66738
` Washington, D.C. 20035-6738
`
`
`Date May 31, 1996 Date June 20, 1996
`
`Attachment
` Page 3
`01-04816
`
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 3 of 8
`
`

`

` Settlement Agreement Between
` the United States of America
` and
` the Florida State Courts System
`
` This matter was initiated by a complaint filed under title II of the
`(cid:31) (cid:31)
`Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. 12131-12134, with the
`United States Department of Justice (hereinafter "the Department") against the
`Twentieth Judicial Circuit of Florida, which is part of the Florida State
`Courts System. The complaint was filed with the Civil Rights Division of the
`Department of Justice, under the authority of 28 C.F.R. Part 35, Subpart F.
`The complainant, who is hard of hearing and who is a defendant in an eminent
`domain proceeding, alleged that the Twentieth Judicial Circuit discriminated
`against her on the basis of her disability by failing to take the appropriate
`steps to ensure that the communication with her during the August 1993
`proceedings was as effective as communication with others. She also alleged
`that the transcription equipment that the Twentieth Judicial Circuit provided
`was ineffective in providing her access to what was being said at her
`three-day trial because of confusing and distracting information being
`displayed on the screen. She further alleged that even though she had filed a
`grievance against the usage of such technology, the same technology was used
`at a later hearing in April 1994.
`
` The Department of Justice is authorized under 28 C.F.R. Part 35,
`Subpart F, to investigate the allegations of the complaint in this matter, to
`determine the compliance of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit with title II of
`the ADA and the Department's implementing regulation, issue findings, and,
`where appropriate, negotiate and secure voluntary compliance agreements.
`Furthermore, the Attorney General is authorized under 42 U.S.C. (cid:31) 12133 to
`bring a civil action enforcing title II of the ADA should the Department fail
`to secure voluntary compliance pursuant to subpart F.
`
` The parties to this Agreement are the United States of America and the
`Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Florida as chief administrative officer
`(cid:31)
`of the judicial branch (Art. V, 2, Fla. Const.) (hereinafter "Chief
`Justice"). In consideration of the terms of this Agreement as set forth below,
`the Attorney General agrees to refrain from undertaking further investigation
`or from filing a civil suit in this matter.
`
` Pursuant to the provision of the ADA entitled "Alternative Means of
`(cid:31)
`Dispute Resolution," 42 U.S.C. 12212, the parties have entered into this
`Agreement. In order to secure compliance by voluntary means, the parties
`hereby agree as follows:
`01-04817
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 4 of 8
`
`

`

` 1. The Chief Justice does not admit by the signing of this Agreement
`that the Florida State Courts System's current policies and practices are in
`violation in any respect with the ADA or its implementing regulation.
`
` 2. The ADA applies to the Florida State Courts System because it is
`a public entity as defined in 42 U.S.C. S 12131 and the Department of
`(cid:31)
`Justice's regulation implementing title II
`, 28 C.F.R. 35.104.
`
` 3. The purpose of the Settlement Agreement is to ensure that persons
`who are deaf or hard of hearing have an equal opportunity to benefit from the
`programs and services of the Florida State Courts System.
`
` 4. The Florida State Courts System has established, and will
`continue to maintain, a written policy, which requires that all Florida courts
`ensure that real-time transcription services used in court proceedings be
`accurate in order to ensure effective participation by a party, witness,
`attorney, judicial employee, judge, or juror who is deaf or hard of hearing.
`The policy states that in order to ensure complete accuracy of real-time
`transcription, the Florida courts must comply with the minimum guidelines as
`set forth in the policy.
`
` 5. Beginning on the effective date of this Agreement, all
`appropriate state court officials responsible for conducting proceedings will
`be instructed to comply with the provisions of this Agreement.
`
` 6. The Florida Supreme Court, through its administrative arm, the
`Office of the State Courts Administrator, will:
`
` a. distribute notice of the Agreement and policy to all
` Florida judges and trial court administrators within 30
` days of the effective date; and
`
` b. schedule and conduct training for chief judges and trial
` court administrators on the practical application of the
` ADA and this Agreement in jury trials and other court
` proceedings, at their next regularly scheduled meetings.
`
` 7. The Department of Justice may review compliance with this
`Agreement at any time. If it determines that this Agreement or any requirement
`thereof has been violated, it may institute a civil action seeking specific
`performance of the provisions of this Agreement in an appropriate Federal
`court.
`
` 8. Failure by the Department of Justice to enforce this entire
`Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other
`provision herein
` Page 2
`01-04818
`
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 5 of 8
`
`

`

`will not be construed as a waiver of the Department's right to enforce other
`deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.
`
` 9. This Agreement is a public document. A copy of this document or
`any information contained in it may be made available to any person. The
`Office of the State Courts Administrator will provide a copy of this Agreement
`to any person upon request.
`
` 10. In the event that the Florida State Courts System fails to comply
`in a timely manner with any requirement of this Agreement without obtaining
`sufficient advance written agreement with the Department as a temporary
`modification of the relevant terms of this Agreement, all terms of this
`Agreement will become enforceable in an appropriate Federal court.
`
` 11. The effective date of this Agreement is the date of the last
`signature below.
`
` 12. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
`parties on the matters raised herein, and no other statement, promise, or
`agreement, either written or oral, made by either party or agents of either
`party, that is not contained in this written Agreement, will be enforceable.
`This Agreement is limited to the facts set forth in the first paragraph, and
`it does not purport to remedy any other potential violations of the ADA or any
`other Federal law. This Agreement does not affect the continuing
`responsibility of the Florida State Courts System, or the Twentieth Judicial
`Circuit, to comply with all aspects of the ADA.
`
`For the Florida State Courts System: For the United States of America:
`
`
`(Signature) (Signature) Robert Mather
`_______________________________ ____________________________
`STEPHEN H. GRIMES, Chief Justice JOHN L. WODATCH, Chief
`as chief administrative officer and on L. IRENE BOWEN, Deputy Chief
`behalf of the Florida State Courts System ROBERT J. MATHER, Attorney
`Supreme Court of Florida Disability Rights Section
`500 South Duval Street Civil Rights Division
`Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1925 U.S. Department of Justice
` P.O. Box 66738
` Washington, D.C. 20035-6738
`
`Date May 31,1996 Date June 20, 1196
`
`Attachment
`
` Page 3
`01-04819
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 6 of 8
`
`

`

` Florida State Courts System
`
` Policy on Court Real-Time Transcription Services
` for Persons Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing
`
` It is the policy of the Florida State Courts System that all judges
`and court staff will abide by the following guidelines in those court
`proceedings where real-time transcription services are utilized as a
`reasonable and necessary method of ensuring effective participation by a
`party, witness, attorney, judge, court employee, juror, or other participant
`who is deaf or hard of hearing and entitled to auxiliary aids or services
`pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990:
`
` 1. Real-time transcription services should be performed by a court
`reporter who is specially trained in this skill.
`
` 2. The device selected should display text in a manner that
`accomplishes full access to the service and should be a non-glare,
`display-type computer monitor; a large-screen image from a data projection
`panel and overhead projector; or other device that ensures effective
`communication. It is recommended that the monitor be 15 inches or larger. The
`size of the monitor should take into account the number of persons viewing it.
`The display of the text should be dark letters on a light background, double
`spaced, with mixed case as appropriate for the context of the proceedings. The
`display font or type size should be a minimum of 18 points. The real-time
`transcription service should display not less than four (4) and no more
`than 17 lines of text at any one time. The display view should be limited to
`text that relates to the real-time transcription service; no system
`information should be visible to the user.
`
` 3. Text displayed on the monitor should appear within three (3)
`seconds from the time of steno-type input. This time frame requirement
`includes time for any and all related spell checks including phonetic
`translation for untranslates.
`
` 4. At the commencement of the proceeding, the court should determine
`whether effective communication is occurring. The court should instruct the
`person receiving the service and other participants in the proceeding to alert
`the court should a translation or other problem occur that impedes the person
`receiving the service from effectively participating in that person's
`appropriate role in the proceeding. Furthermore, if the court reporter becomes
`aware that an unacceptable number of untranslates or other problem is
`occurring with the real-time transcription service, the court reporter should
`immediately alert the court. Should the real-time transcription service become
`ineffective, the court should determine the cause of the problem and implement
`any corrective action the court deems reasonable or necessary.
`01-04820
`
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 7 of 8
`
`

`

` 5. The reporter, prior to the beginning of the proceeding, should
`review the case file and build a good client/job dictionary. This same job
`dictionary should be used at each subsequent proceeding in a particular case.
`The job dictionary should be updated during the course of the proceeding to
`include untranslates that may be corrected by any of the parties during the
`proceedings. Such updates should be operable throughout the remainder of the
`proceeding's real-time transcription service and carried over to any future
`proceedings.
`
` 6. The real-time transcription service and corrections that were
`displayed on the screen or monitor during the proceeding must be preserved in
`a manner to reflect what was actually displayed. Any corrections that were not
`viewed but that later become a part of the official court record must be
`maintained separately from the record of displayed text. At the conclusion of
`any proceeding (other than juror deliberations) in which real-time
`transcription service has been provided to ensure effective communication for
`a person who is deaf or hard of hearing, the reporter shall preserve the
`record of the real-time transcription service in accordance with
`rule 2.075(e), Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, unless otherwise
`directed by the court.
`
` 7. If real-time transcription services are required for a juror who
`is deaf or hard of hearing, a court reporter shall be present in the jury room
`during jury deliberations. The role of the reporter, when in the jury room, is
`not as a reporter of the official record; therefore the real-time
`transcription service of jury deliberations must be deleted immediately upon
`the conclusion of jury deliberation. The reporter shall not counsel, advise,
`attempt to explain terms, or interject personal opinion. Furthermore, the
`reporter shall not read back the real-time transcription service from the
`proceeding or jury deliberations without express judicial approval or
`authorization.
`
` Page 2
`01-04821
`
`Ultratec Exhibit 1009
`Ultratec v Sorenson IP Holdings Page 8 of 8
`
`