# RECEfVEO AUG- 12012 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

# HEARING DOCKET OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C. *********************************************** 

### * In the Matter ofAERO MICRONESIA 

### * * * Respondent. 

### * * * * *********************************************** 

### FAA Docket No.: Unassigned FDMS No. FAA-2012-0468 & 

### 0469 FAA Region: Western-Pacific Judge: Ronnie A. Yoder

COMPLAINANT'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO STRIKE

To: Honorable Ronnie A. 

### Yoder, ChiefAdministrative Law Judge, and Respondent Aero Micronesia. The following is Complainant's reply to Responde,nt's July 13,2012 Motion to Strike theAmended Complaint. The Complaint was amended simply to change the cited violation from 14 C.F.R. §121.137(b) to 14 C.F.R. §121.137(a). The factual allegations remain the same**~** 

### essentially thatthe person in charge ofRespondent's training had outdate.d manuals. Respondent argues that any amendmentto the Complaint was to be filed by June 22, 2012, in accordance with the Order Establishing Procedures. It is true that said Order states that "[t]o expedite the hearing inthis matter, Complainant and Respondent, on or ' ,' ,_ ' 

### before June 22,2012, shall file

... any amendment ofthe complaint or answer. .." However, the Amended Complaintwas filed on June 25,2012, merely3 days beyond the date imposed bythe Order. Respondent hadnotyettiled an Answer to the original Complaint when the Amended Complaint was served. The parties have notyet engaged in discovery. The hearing date mutual!yyroposedby the parties is Januat-y 15, 2013, nearly six months away. Thus, acceptance ofthe Amended Complaintwill impart nodelay to the hearing inthis case. Itis also noted that 14 C.F.R. 

### §13.214 permits amendments to a complaint not later than 15 days beforethe scheduled date ofa hearing. Finally, it is the Administrator's tenet that cases shouldbe decided onthe merits whenever possible. See Safety Equipment and Sign Co., Ltd., FAA Order No. 92-76, p. 5 (December 21, 1992). Denial ofRespondent's Motionto Strike will allow a decision on the merits. Respectfully submitted,

By:

## a~ 

# _z**~""** DonBo Attorney for FAA Dated: July 27, 2012



### 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date I have placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid, the COMPLAINANT'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO STRIKE, addressed as follows:

And a copy to: Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur WrightBuilding-Suite 2W1000

The Honorable Rmmie A. Yoder ChiefAdministrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Dept ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE East Building Ground Floor, Room E11-310 Washington, D.C. 20590 Also by facsimile: 202-366-7536 I further certify that on this date I have placed inthe United States mail, postage prepaid, a true copy ofthe above, addressed as follows:

Dated: July 27, 2012 David Kirstein, Esq. Kirstein & Young PLLC 1750 K Street, NW, Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20006 Also by facsimile: 202-331-3933



# (// lflth 

# V/A.h L Agnes Ebilane Legal Technician Office ofthe Regional Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Western-Pacific Region Hawthorne, California

3