# EIVED

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

## FEB 27 2015

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,Complainant,

v. PRO FORM PRODUCTS LTD. Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 

## HEARING DOCKET

FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-1122 Case No. 2012S0700264 JUDGEJ.E. SULLIVAN

RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Respondent, Pro FormProducts Ltd., by and throughundersigned counsel, and in response to ComplainantFederal Aviation Administration's Complaint, states as follows: I. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I (1) ofthe Complaint. II 1. Respondent admits only that on or aboutJune 11,2012, Respondent offered to DHL a one-piece shipmentfor transportation by air and denies each and every other allegations contained in Section II (1) of the Complaint. 2. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section II (2) ofthe Complaint. 3. Respondent admits the allegations contained inSection II (3) of the Complaint.4. Respondent does not dispute thatthe shipmentwas not accompaniedby a Shipper's Certification or Declaration of Dangerous Goods. However, Respondent indicated inthe shipment documents with DHL that the material being shipped was "all purpose cleaner." 5. Respondentis withoutknowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe allegations inSection II (5) of the Complaint, and therefore denies the same. 6. Respondent is withoutknowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe allegations in Section II (6) ofthe Complaint, and therefore denies the same. 7. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section II (7) ofthe Complaint. 8 a. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section II (8)(a) of the Complaint. b. Respondent admits that the material it unknowingly shipped is Flammable Liquid N.O.S. (Ethylbenzene) whichis in Hazard Class 3, Packing Group II, and has an assigned identification number of UN 1993, but denies the allegation thatthe proper shippingname ofthe material is Flammable Liquid N.O.S. (Hydrogen chloride). 9. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section II (9)(a) to (d), but denies the allegations contained in Section II (9)(e) to (f). Respondent further states that it indicated in the shipment documents with DHL that the number of packages being shippedwas "1" and the total weight ofthe material was "28 oz." 

### 210 Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section II (10) of the Complaint. 11. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section II (11) ofthe Complaint. 12. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section II (12) ofthe Complaint. Respondent further states that itprovided its contactinformationin the shipment documents with DHL. 13. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section II (13) ofthe Complaint. Respondent further states that itprovided its contact informationin the shipment documents withDHL. 14. Respondent is withoutknowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe allegations in Section II (14) ofthe Complaint, and therefore denies the same. 15. Respondent is withoutknowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Section II (15) of the Complaint, and therefore denies the same. III 16. Respondent denies allegations contained in SectionIII (16)(a)- (q) ofthe Complaint. Infurther response to the allegations contained inthis Section III (16), Respondentrepeats and incorporates by reference his replies to Paragraphs 1 through 15 of SectionII hereof and denies generally thatit knowingly or intentionally violated

3any of the regulations contained inthis Section III (16) of the Complaint and demands strict proof thereof. 17. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section III (17) ofthe Complaint. 18. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section III (18) of the Complaint. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. The Complaintfails to state a claim warrantingthe proposed penalty. 2. The Complaintfails to state a claim upon whichrelief may be granted. 3. Respondent did notknowingly or intentionally violate any law or regulation. 4. Respondent did not "knowingly" offer hazardous materials for transportationby air. 5. Respondentreserves the right to assert additional defenses as may become apparentthrough additional investigation and discovery. WHEREFORE, Respondent, Pro FormProducts Ltd., havingfully responded to FAA's Complaint, respectfully requests thatjudgmentbe entered inits favor, the Complaint and civil penalty ofthe Federal Aviation Administrationbe dismissed with prejudice and that Respondentbe awarded its costs herein and such other relief, legal or equitable, that the Administrative LawJudge deems suitable and proper.

45 Respectfully submitted,

Stuart A. Laven, Jr. (0071110) Cavitch, Familo & DurkinCo., LPA 1300 East Ninth St. -20th Floor Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Telephone: 216-621-7860 Facsimile: 216-621-3415 Email: slaven@cavitch.com 

### Attorney forRespondentCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing Answer has been sent via FedEx on February 26, 2015 to: Hearing Docket Clerk FAA, AGC

- 430, Suite 2W 1000 Wilbur Wright Building 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591

Administrative LawJudge J.E. Sullivan Office of Hearings, M-20 U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 NewJersey Ave, SE 

### cjo Mail Center (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590

Robert B. Dixon Federal Aviation Administration Office of the Regional Counsel, AS0-7 Southern Region 1701 Columbia Avenue College Park, GA 30337

6 Stuart A Laven, Jr.