SERVED MARCH 1, 2012 

OEP/ARTMENT OF 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. :dA':'3PpPJA^^^^^ 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

:OCKt ]• OPERATIC)^ 

mi m-\ p ! 

iO 

i O 

IN THE MATTER OF: ) 

) DOCKET NO. FAA-2011-1116 

IVY ENTERPRISES, [NC, ) 

.) CaseNo. 2010SO700376 

Respondent ) 

) 

SECOND ORDER 

SETTING RULE 16 LITIGATION SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, AND 

DIRECTING RULE 26(f) PLANNING AND SUBMISSION 

On February 21, 2012 an Order Denying Respondent's Motions for a More Definitive 

Statement and a Stay of Discovery and Granting/Denying Other Relief was filed. 

On Wednesday, February 29, 2012, the parties appeared by telephone for a Litigation 

Scheduling Conference, and discussed litigation procedural issues as well as iheir calendar availability to reschedule the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference. It is Hereby Ordered: 

1) Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference: 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(a)(1) and (7) and Civ. R. 16, the parlies shall appear by telephone on Thursday, April 5, 2012 at lQ:00am Eastern time for a Rule 16 

Litigation Scheduling Conference. During this Conference the parties will discuss the issues in the dispute, their jointly submitted proposed scheduling/discovery plan (see paragraph 2 infra) and respond to any questions regarding disagreements not resolved in the 

proposed plan. During the Conference a fmal scheduling/discovery plan will be ruled 

upon, as well as any other related matters pursuant to Rule 16(c). TheOffice of Hearings 

will initiate the Conference by telephone call, contacting each party at the party's telephone number of record. A party may provide an alternate number by notifying the Office of Hearings at least 24 hours prior to the Conference. 

2) Rule 26(f) Attorneys' Planning Meeting, and Submission of Proposed Discovery Plan: 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §13.217 and Civ. R. 26(f), prior to convening with the 

Judge for the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference, the parties shall privately conduct a Rule 26(0 planning meeting and prepare a jointly written proposed scheduling/discovery plan, which must be completed and filed with the undersigned Judge on or 

before Thursday, March 29, 2012 (i.e., seven (7) calendar days before the Conference). 

In addition to filing the proposed scheduling/discovery plan by regular mail filing with 

the U.S. Department of Transportation's Docket Office, the parlies shall file a working 

copy of the scheduling/discovery plan with the undersigned Judge at the Office of HearPage I of2 
ings by fax, express carrier, or personal delivery. The certificate of service should refiect 

the manner of service. 

The Attorneys' Rule 26(f) planning meeting shall include a good faith discussion 

about the nature and basis of each parly's claims, the possibility of resolving all or pail of 

the case, the scope and type of discovery (including electronic discovery) and the place of 

venue for hearing. During this meeting, the parties shall discuss matters identified in 14 

C.F.R. §13.217 and Rule 26(f)(2) and (3) as pari of developing their proposed scheduling/discovery plan. The parlies' planning meeting should also include discussion about 

the sequence and timing of follow-up discovery, including whether that discovery should 

be conducted in phases to prepare for any filing of parlicular motions (e.g., limiting scope 

of trial, dispositive motions, etc). The deadlines in the parties' proposed scheduling/discovery plan should be mutually agreeable, with a view to achieving ease resolution 

• with a minimum of expense and delay. Any unresolved scheduling/discovery disputes 

should be clearly identified in the proposed plan, so that these disputes may be addressed 

by the Judge during the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference. 

3) Conflicts with Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference Dale: 

. If a parly develops an unavoidable conflict wilh the scheduled Rule 16 Litigation 

Scheduling Conference set in paragraph 1 supra, and wishes to modify the date/time of 

the scheduled Conference, the parly shall flrsl confer with opposing counsel about mutually agreeable alternate dates, and then contact C. Diane Mays at the Office of Hearings 

(202-366-2132) as soon as possible after receipt of this Order, with at least three (3) mutually-agreed, proposed alternate dates/times for the Judge's consideration. 

Ivan 

rative Law Judge 

Attachment: Service List 

Page 2 of2 
FDMSNo. FAA-20II-I116 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Alexander G. Baleman, Jr., Respondent's Counsel 

Ruskin Moscou Faltischek P.C. 

1425 R;(R Plaza 

Bast Tower. 15th Floor 

Uniondale,NY 11556-1425 

TEL: 516-663-6589 

FAX: 516-663-6789 

Jeanine C. Golimer, Complainant '.y Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3272 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

The Honorable J.E. SwXW'^^n, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue. S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administraiion, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.