# AECEIVED
US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS FEDERALAVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

## MAR 252014 HEARING DOCKET Federal Aviation Administration Complainant, VS. AVIONICS MASTERS INC. Respondent ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )


# _____________ ) Docket No. FAA-2013-0288 Judge J.E. Sullivan FAA Case. No. 2012S0190209

RESPONDENT'S NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF ATTORNEY RespondentAvionics Masters, Inc., pursuantto 14 C.F.R. 13.209 ofthe Rules ofPractice, filesthis NoticeofAppearanceofthe undersigned attorney. Demand is herebymadethatall future communications shall be directed to, and pleadings shall be served to, the undersigned counsel. Further, in the interest ofjust and expeditious conclusion ofthe above cause of action, it is hereby requested thatthe FAACounsel pleasefurnish the undersigned a PDF courtesy copy of pleadingsfiled, discovery demands made, and discovery responsesthatthe undersigned may not yet have received from his client. The undersigned will provide a list documentsthat he believes
are not yet furnished to him.

DATED: Tuesday, March 18, 2014

W6031514/K-42988 Page 1of 2 Counsel for Res n nt Mohammad A Faruqui, ESQ. Aerolaw Offic PLLC Florida Bar# 20875 633 SE 3'd Ave, Suite 4R Trial Lawyers Building Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Designated Emails for Service: Mohammad@Aerolaw.info Barbarad@Aerolaw.infoCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have on this date, Tuesday, March 18, 2014, served the foregoing to the following parties using the below-described methods: Original and one copy via Regular U S mail and fax: Federal Aviation Administration BOO IndependenceAvenue, S.W. Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 WilburWright Building - Suite 2W1000 Washington, D.C. 20591 Fax: 1-202-493-5123
One copy via Regular U.S. mail only: Honorable Judge J.E. Sullivan Office of Hearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAvenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, D.C. 20590
One copy via Regular U.S. mail, fax, and email: c/o Christopher R. Stevenson, Attorney Office ofthe Regional Counsel, Southern Region Federal Aviation Administration P.O. Box 20636 Atlanta, GA 30320 Email: chris.stevenson@faa.gov Fax: 1-404-305-5223
One courtesy copy via email only: Charles L. Hunt, Jr. Vincent Sorentino Avionics Master, Inc. 1001 West Cypress Creek Road, Suite 309 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 Email: Chadhunt@aol.com

W6031514/K-42988 Page 2 of 2U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Federal Aviation Administration Complainant, vs. AVIONICS MASTERS INC. Respondent ) ) ) 

### ) ) ) ) ) )



# _________________________) Docket No. FAA-2013-0288 Judge J.E. Sullivan FAA Case. No. 2012S0190209

RESPONDENT'S AMENDED ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES RespondentAvionics Masters, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, and pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 13.214(a) and (b)(1) ofthe Rules of Practice, files this Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Complaint, stating as follows: 1. RespondentADMITS to the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 ofthe Complaintfiled on June 5, 2013 (hereinafter "the Complaint"). 2. Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 ofthe Complaint. 3. RespondentADMITS to the allegations contained in Paragraph 5ofthe Complaint. 4. Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraphs 6, 7, and 8 of the Complaint. FACTS IN SUPPORT OF AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 5. On or about December 22, 2011, Avionics Masters issued a Form 8130-3 with a Work Order No. 8078 for a Bendix/King directional gyro, model KG102A, serial number 32301 (hereinafter "the DG"). 6. Avionics Masters usesthe Form 8130-3forinternaltracking and in accordancewith

W6031514/K-42989 Page 1of 5

### FAAOrder8130.21G 1
, 

### which states in partthat use ofthe Form 8130-3 is optional. 7. Dueto atypographical error, Block 12ofthe Form 8130-3was inadvertently marked
as "Repaired" instead of "Inspected". 8. Nevertheless, the Form 8130-3 is notthe primary documentto evidence what kind ofworkAvionics Masters performed. Avionics Masters relies on aWorkOrderand any supporting documents attached to the Work Order, specifically a Form 101. 9. Avionics Masters prepared a 15-page itemized Form 101 and attached it to Work Order#8078, and page 13 ofForm 101 remarked onlythatthe DG was inspected. 10. The DG was not in actuality repaired byAvionics Masters. In fact, Avionics Masters did not even tear down the DG, which would have been a necessary task as part of repairing a DG. On the contrary, during a broader Level 1 inspection of a Bendix/King KFC 200 Autopilot, Avionics Masters only performed afunctional test ofthe DG as part ofthe Level 1 inspection. 11. The DG was not in actuality returned to service in an aircraft. In fact, the DG was not even installed 

### in an aircraft. Instead, upon issuance of Form 8130-3 dated December22, 2011, the DG was inventoried and placed in storage with Southern Aero Avionics, LLC. The DG remained in storage for approximately 5 months. 12. On or about May 10, 2012, the same DG was removed from storage to be reinspected

### foran appropriate installation. Atthistime, Respondent discovered that Block 12 ofthe original Form 8130-3 dated December22, 2011 incorrectly stated "Repaired" instead of "Inspected".

1FAA Order 8130.21G has since been cancelled by its successor FAAOrder 8130.21 H. However, at all times relevant to this cause action including the time ofthe alleged offense, the effective orderwas 8310.21G. W6031514/K-42989 Page 2 of 5

### 13. Pursuant to FAA Order 8130.21G 3-7, the Respondent then issued a corrected Form 8130-3 to reflect the correct disposition ofthe DG. Section 3-7 ofthe Order permits a repair facility to re-issue a Form 8130-3 to correct typographical errors. (Attached and incorporated herein is Respondent's Exhibit 1). 14. Respondent then re-inspected the DG, determined that it had failed the reinspection, and on June 27, 2012, sent the DG to Velocity Aerospace for further testing and subsequent overhauL 15. Velocity then issued its own Form 8130-3 on June 29, 2012 after completing its overhaul ofthe DG. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

### 16. Respondent re-alleges and incorporates herein Paragraphs 1 through 12 of its Amended Answerto Complaint as stated above. 17. As its First Affirmative Defense, the Respondent states that its actions are not a violation of FAR 145.5(a). 18. As its Second Affirmative Defense, the Respondent states that its actions are not
aviolation of FAR 145.201(b). 19. As its Third Affirmative Defense, the Respondent states that its actions are not a violation ofany other Federal Aviation Regulation. 20. As its Fourth Affirmative Defense, the Respondent states that its actions are not grounds for a civil penalty under49 U.S.C. Sections 46301 (a)-(d). 21. As its Fifth Affirmative Defense, the Respondent statesthat FAA Inspectors Roger McGien and Carlton Kitchen did not witness that the DG was actually returned to service or installed in an aircraft.
W6031514/K-42989 Page 3 of 5

### 22. As its Sixth Affirmative Defense, the Respondent statesthat FAA Inspectors Roger McGien and Carlton Kitchen were present atAvionics Mastersjustafewdays after Avionics Masters discoveredtheabove-described clerical erroronthe original Form 8130-3, and that Avionics Masters did not yet have the opportunity to issue corrected documents at the time FAA Inspectors discovered the original 8130-3. 23. As its Seventh Affirmative Defense, the Respondent states thatthe original Form 8130-3and the corrected Form 8130-3 do notconstitute asthe primarydocuments that evidencewhat kind ofworkAvionics Masters performed. Rather, the primary documents are the Work Order and the Form 101 attached to the Work Order. According to Form 101, Avionics Masters only inspected the DG but did not repair the DG. 24. As its Eighth Affirmative Defense, the Respondent states that a rudimentary functional check ofa DG, as part ofa Level 1 inspection ofan auto pilot, does not constitute a Level 3 component repair ofa DG, and therefore is not a violation of FAR 145.5(a) or FAR 145.201(b).

DATED: Tuesday, March 18, 2014

VV6031514/K-42989 Page 4of 5 

### Respectfully submited/1 

# {J!ffih

Counsel for R dent MohammadAhmed Faruqui, ESQ. Aerolaw Offices PLLC Florida Bar# 20875 633 SE 3'd Ave, Suite 4R Trial Lawyers Building Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Designated Emails for Service: Mohammad@Aerolaw.info Barbarad@Aerolaw.infoCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBYCERTIFYthat I have on this date, Tuesday, March 18, 2014, served the foregoing to the following parties using the below-described methods: Original and one copy via Regular U.S. mail and fax: Federal Aviation Administration 800 IndependenceAvenue, S.W. Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 WilburWright Building - Suite 2W1 000 Washington, D.C. 20591 Fax: 1-202-493-5123
One copyvia Regular U.S. mail only: Honorable Judge J.E. Sullivan Office of Hearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAvenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, D.C. 20590
One copy via Regular U.S. mail, fax, and email: c/o Christopher R. Stevenson, Attorney Office ofthe Regional Counsel, Southern Region Federal Aviation Administration P.O. Box 20636 Atlanta, GA 30320 Email: chris.stevenson@faa.gov Fax: 1-404-305-5223 One courtesy copy via email only: Charles L. Hunt, Jr. Vincent Sorentino Avionics Master, Inc. 1001 West Cypress Creek Road, Suite 309 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 Email: Chadhunt@aol.com

Page 5 of 5