12-138 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, Docket No.: FAA-2014-0807 Complainant, FAA Case No. 2011 SO 190272 vs. Judge: J.E. Sullivan PAZ AVIATION, INC., Location ofHearing: Miami, FL Respondent.

--------


### ----~/ MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT AND REPLY MEMORANDUM CONCERNING RESl'ONDENT'S MOTION TO DIMISS In response to the Administrator's Amendment ofits Complaint, Respondent restates its Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum ofLaw initially filed herein, as though set forth in full. Dismissal ofComplaint (and Amended Complaint) pursuant to 49 USC §46301 To smmnarize, while 14 CFR §13.201 et seq. sets forth the FAA's Rules of Practice with regard to Civil Penalty Actions, tho requirements ofthose rules are subordinate to U.S. Statutory Law as set forth in 49 USC §4630I. While it is true that the FAA Administrative Law Judges have held that a Notice ofPtoposed Civil Penalty is sufficient to comply with the requirements ofthe FAA's Rules ofPractice, as set forth in Respondent's initial memorandum, compliance with 49 USC §46301(d)(7)(C) requires the initiation ofa lawsuit via the filing ofComplaint. In Re Aerocomp, FAA-2005-21 064, 2005 FAA Lexis 798 (September 29, 2005), citing Johnson v. SEC, 87 F.Jd 484 (D.C. Cir 1996) anclJMCo. v. Browner, 17 F.3d 1453 (D.C. Cir 1994). lnAerocomp, the court noted the difference between 28 USCA §2462 and the FAA's own rule ofprocedure
McDONALD & i'llcDONALll. P. A., P. 0. llox 669122, i\flnml, FL-33166-9428 TEL: (305) 643-5313,

**FAX~** (305) 643-4990;

**E-~·fAIL**·, dnmt@Mcdoualdn!torneys.comDocket No.: FAA-2014-0807 contained in 14 CFR 13.208(d) which gives rise to dismissal ifthe FAA fails to issue a Notice ofProposcd Civil Penalty within two years after the alleged incident giving rise to the violation. Similar to 28 USCA §2462, 49 USCA §46J01(d)(7)(C) requires the FAA to file its Complaint within two years after the incident giving rise to the alleged violation. With regard to 28 USCA §2462, the courts have held that the issuance ofa Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty is merely a pre-suit informal negotiating activity and that is insufficient to stop the tolling of28 USCA §2462. Aerocomp, supra; In Re Aviation 

### Brake Service, Inc., 2006 Lexis 226 (March 9, 2006); 

### In Re Karl, FAA-2005-22889, 2006 DOT Av. Lexis 664 (September 19, 2006). The Administrator attempts to confuse the two requirements in order to sho·w compliance with 49 USC §46301 because it cannot independently comply with the requirements ofthe statute. Based upon the foregoing, without reiterating the entirety ofRespondent's argument set forth in its initial memorandum, where the Respondent submits that the entire Complaint should be dismissed for failure to comply with 49 USC §4630l(d)(7)(C). Affirmative Defense ofLaches The Administrator argues that Respondent cannot prove facts giving rise to the Affirmative Defense ofLaches, The Administrator makes this argument without reference to any evidentiary basis contradicting the affrdavit ofRespondent that sets forth the minimum requirements for the laches defense. The burden ofgoing forward with the evidence then shifts to the Administrator and the Administrator completely failed to meet that bmden. In an attempt to catch its fingernails on some evidentiary item, the Administrator makes much to do about the statement obtained by the FAA from one of Respondent's employees. The employee's statement is:

2 i'llcDONALD & McDONALD. P. A., P. 0.

**no~** 669!22, i\liami, FL

**33166~9.J28** TEL.: (305) 643-5313, FAX: (305) 643-4990; E-MAIL: dmm@Mcdonaldauorneys.com

Vlld o;;z::n S

**~OZ/6 ~190**  V jO Z a6i!d

### DockcfNo,.: FAA-·20 14··0807 "1 

### AMon\o Y<il1ezTested trliit

### I'.N. 65"44561·15 S.N.8356 W/0 27429, 29345 and 25837Flight SpbiJet'Actuator. 1 did 

### noftes:Hbe unit 100%fo1· 

### lack ofsbliJC 

### tooling.'' The statement is 

### midated. The statetiltllt hidicates that 

### lv!i Yal1e$ cotlldnoi test lhe tmit eompleteJy,but.faiiS·fO 

### Statewhilttest

### he COLJ)cl 

### not pcrfo\·niar1cliai\sto 

### st<\tewhatto6Ji11g he \vas rliissi!1g. Based bit

### the foregbhJg, the state111Cnthas i1o 

### eViclentiruyvalue as to 

### whether or nottherespotidcilt

### h<id.the 

### tooling, w11iChis 

### th¢ sUbject

### matterofthe Administriltor's Complain toll anygiven date. 

### At!hevery

### worst

### case for 

### Respondei1t, it 

### would. 

## olilyprovide ev[delite 

### ;.vithtegard

## i6

**the.s]Jedfic'p~ttt**

## by serirutttihibet

### and

**tmtth~**

**nwltittlcl~** 

### ofHllegeclviolatipnsthat the Administrator

### aHeges occm:red. The only 

### evidence

**befoh~** 

### the comt at (histilh.estitlJ'H:n'!s R(')spondent' s

**po.~itkm** 

### tlUtt it

### was prejudieecl..by the FAA's 

### failwe to tintely bringthisactlon.


### Based l1j)onthef6l'egoing,

**!iol\\~tbstattdihg** 

### the Achniitistrator'samettclmentof

### the Complaint 

### deleting those allegations 

## which

**vlol~ted** oftheAdtninisn·ator's owh 

### rules 

### of 

### practice,th.e Coniplaintstill 

### fails to c:omply wlth 

### tlie srattltoty tequ!ti:nle)tts of49 tJSC §4630Tam:l the 

### FAA has failed 

### to carryilshttrClen 

### goi!lg

### Jorwatd with the 

### evideitce to 

### coJittadiet the 

### facts giVing 

### dse to

**R.e,~polldetit'sAfflblitrtive** 

### Defelise 

### ofLaches., Based upon the tbrego!ng,

### Responcle1Jtrespectfully 

### requests tbatthe 

### Anlended Con1!Jlaintbe dismissed ili

### its entirety and 

### such firrther 

### reliefas 

### this 

### Cwrtdeetns equitable Ol'just. Respectfully subnlittecf,

J i\rtDONAltf &:·f\ItDONALD.- P,;-A,,._P: 0:· Box·

**669-t21;-I\JJami~** FL

**3·3166~.9428** tEL:_(305}'6.43

**~:53**.13,.-FAX: .005}643-4990;. E-IV1AJL:

**d!iil'ir@'McJcn·I;'Jldtl\forneys,~i.:i'tn**

### Docket No.: FAA·20l4-0807 CERTlFICATiii 

### Ol<'SERVIq; · I HEREBY certifythat thet)riginalat1d 

### one copy 

### ofthc·.fotegoi:tigwas faxeda11d mailed this 

### 1911' 

### day 

### ofJ\ll1e, 

### 2015 to: HoiJ. J.E. Sullivali,Administrative

### Law Judge 

### Offic¢ofHeatings, M-20 

### U.S. Depattlnent ofTransj)brtatiOii 

### l200New

### JctscyAvenne, S.E. (Ell-JiO) Washlngt6i1, DC 20590
. 202-366-694I
.. 202-366-7536- 

### fax HearingDocket Cl<:rk (original 

### +· l cop)') FAA, AGC-430, 

### Sclite2W!OOO Wilbur

### WtightJ3uildil1g··· 800

### I11dependence · Avem16; 

### SW Washington, DC 2059! 202"267cl293**~.fax** 

### . Willimit Vines, Altomey 

### t•'edera! AviatitHl Aclininistmtiot1 Officeofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7· So1ltheh1 Region 170.1 Cohlillbia AveJittc 

### Coll<lge Patk,. GA 30337 4Q4 

### 305-5200 -tel. 404 305"522T"'"fax Co!JijJlcd!lcm! ;.Y Cot/hsel Paz Aviation, Il1c. c/o Jay Allen, 

### Pi·es.idcht 

### 745.5 W2"" CoUrt Hialeah; l?L 33014;4:301**Re.~p011den!** McDONALD & McDONALD, P 

### .A AltOl'J)eys fot· Res1jondent 

### P0 

## Box 669122 Miami, FL 

### 3:316<5-9428 (305) 643,.5313 (305) 643"4990**~fax** 

### dtnn1@Mcdo1laldattornevs.com**-...-":'~:·"\:** '" '-' -_- "'**·;,,_--~,**.., --' ' ;.: '7 

### ,j
... . \
.......

### <· 7/J",(i''[\····
.... ..•. 

### /ij'**J.t?~'..:~**



# ...· ..·**:>:~~ZQYt>/(_l~~**.. 

### e::;:::> IDavtd M, McDonald , 

### Fl<r, Bar No, 08443 80

- - ------ - i\l'CDONA'lifi&· 1\ltD.ONALD,·r. A,,. 'P. 0 .. nux 6-69122', i'tfi':ltii'ij_FLJ3l66-9428 TEL: (31J5}(i43-53l3i FAX:: (3:05} 64'3-4€J90;-.**E-l~At;\lL'·-dlllili@McdOna1drt1t{)m~YS.cCun'**