ARB CASE NO. 07-004
ALJ CASE NO. 06-SOX-089
DATE: August 23, 2007
In the Matter of:
KEITH LOWE,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL
COMPANY, L.P.,
RESPONDENT.
BEFORE: THE
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD
Appearances:
For the Complainant:
Steve Kardell, Jr., Esq., Clouse, Dunn, Khoshbin, LLP, Dallas, Texas
FINAL ORDER APPROVING WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINANT’S
PETITION FOR REVIEW AND DISMISSING APPEAL
On September 15,
2006, a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a Ruling on a
Motion to Deem Admitted and Motion for Summary Decision (Decision) in this case
arising under the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002,
Title VIII of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX),[1] and its implementing regulations.[2]
The ALJ found that
[Page 2]
the Respondent, Terminix International Company, L.P., was
entitled to summary decision on a complaint filed by the Complainant, Keith
Lowe.
On October 2,
2006, Lowe filed with the Administrative Review Board (Board) a petition requesting
the Board to review the ALJ’s ruling. The Board issued a Notice of Appeal and
Briefing Schedule on October 13, 2006.
On November 27,
2006, the Board received Lowe’s request that his Petition for Review be withdrawn.
If the Board grants a party’s request to dismiss its appeal, the ALJ’s decision
in the case becomes the final decision of the Secretary of Labor.[3]
Accordingly, we GRANT Lowe’s request to withdraw his Petition for Review
and DISMISS his appeal.
SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief
Administrative Appeals Judge
OLIVER M. TRANSUE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[1] 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West 2007). Title VIII of Sarbanes-Oxley is
designated as the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002.
Section 806 provides protection to employees against discrimination by
companies with a class of securities registered under section 12 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78l, and companies required to
file reports under section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15
U.S.C. § 78o(d), or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent
of such companies because the employee provided information to the employer, a
Federal agency or Congress relating to alleged violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341,
1343, 1344, or 1348, or any rule or regulation of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against
shareholders. In addition, SOX protects employees against discrimination when
they have filed, testified in, participated in, or otherwise assisted in a
proceeding filed or about to be filed against one of the above companies
relating to any such violation or alleged violation. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A
(a)(1), (2).
[2] 29 C.F.R. Part 1980 (2007).
[3] See 29 C.F.R. § 1980.109(c). Accord
Johnson v. EG&G Def. Materials, Inc., ARB No. 06-067, ALJ No. 2005-SDW-002,
slip op. at 2 (ARB May 25, 2006).
