In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: DECEMBER 24, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Docket No. F AA-2013-0291 

AIRBORNE MAINTENANCE 

AND ENGINEERING SERVICES 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Respondent ) 

Case No. 2011S0290032 

ORDER CONFIRMING THAT RESPONDENT'S DEADLINE 

TO FILE RESPONSE IS JANUARY 5, 2015 

On December 18, 2014, an Order Granting Respondent's Motion to Modify Litigation 

Schedule and Extend Two Dispositive Motion Deadlines was filed 

On December 19, 20 14, the FAA filed its Response to Renewed Motion for Sanctions 

and Motion to Compel and Exclude ("Response" and "Motion to Compel"). 

On December 23, 2014, the Respondent filed Respondent's Motion for Extension of 

Time ("Motion"). In this Motion, the Respondent noted that the FAA had filed new Motions in 

its December 19, 2014 Response, and it sought an extension oftime to answer such requests. 

Brief Discussion 

In its Motion, the Respondent agrees that on December 19, 2014 it received a copy of the 

FAA's Response and Motion to Compel. This receipt was by facsimile ("fax"). Attached to the 

FAA's Response and Motion to Compel was a Certificate of Service, stating that a hard copy of 

the FAA's materials had also been served on the Respondent by certified mail that same day, 

December 19, 2014. The Respondent was still waiting to receive the certified mail copy. (Mot., 

1-2.) 

The Respondent requests clarification regarding what constitutes valid service. This 

clarification is requested during the FAA's absence from the proceedings. According to the 

Respondent, ifthe FAA's fax service is not considered valid service under the regulations, then 

~ ... .: t~! '""! 
its motion is moot, since it can add five days for service by certified mail, pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 

§ 13.211(e). (ld. at 1, fn 1.) However, ifthe FAA's fax service is considered valid service, then 

the Respondent seeks an extension oftime from December 29, 2014 to January 5, 2015, so that it 

may file a Response to the FAA's newly made discovery motions. 

In the past two decades, parties in litigation have increasingly agreed to the use of 

alternate electronic service by email or fax. However, the Rules of Practice ("Rules") in these 

proceedings specifically provide for only two types of valid service between the parties: personal 

delivery (including expedited courier service) and U.S. Mail. 14 C.F.R. § 13.211(b) and 14 

C.F.R. § 13.210(a) (equating delivery in person with delivery via expedited courier service). The 

Rules were adopted prior to the proliferation of electronic alternatives (i.e., email or fax), and 

prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks, which changed the method and timing ofhow federal 

government offices receive, process, and deliver U.S. mail. 

It should be noted, however, that throughout these and other FAA proceedings, this Court 

has directed the parties to file with this Court a courtesy copy of all documents by fax or personal 

delivery on or before the court-ordered deadline date. The Court has also expressly advised the 

parties that "filing" with this' Court means date-stamped received by the Court. This filing 

method enables the Court to timely receive filings, ensure compliance with court-ordered 

deadlines, and to efficiently and effectively rule on motions within time periods provided in the 

Litigation Schedule. 

In addition, the September 30, 2014 Order Modifying the Litigation Dates and 

Procedures in this case directs that "[ s ]tatements in opposition to discovery motions must be filed 

within ten (10) calendar days after service of the motion." (9/30/14 Order, pages 3-4 ~G.) This 

generally follows the Rule that provides a party may file an answer to a discovery motion "not 

later than 10 days after service of a motion" (14 C.F.R. § 13.218(d)). However, the September 

30, 2014 Order provides a clarification that "10 days" means calendar days, not working days. 

The goal of "service" is to provide the defending party with "notice in such a manner and 

at such a time that the defending party will have a fair opportunity to answer." Steven BaickerMcKee, et.al, Federal Civil Rules Handbook, West Publishing (2012) (Rule 4). It might be 

argued that actual notice by fax might meet such goals. However, in the absence of any 

Page 2 of 3 
participation from the FAA in this case (see, 12/15/14 FAA Notice ofUnavailability), the issue 

of whether fax service should be deemed to meet the goals of service - when it is not specifically 

provided for in the Rules - should be deferred. 

The Certificate of Service attached to the FAA's Motion to Compel shows a service date 

by certified mail on December 19, 2014. (Mot. to Compel, Cert. of Service.) Thus, the mailing 

rule contained in 14 C.F.R. § 13.2ll(e) applies in this case to the Respondent's answer to the 

Motion to Compel. Consequently, the Respondent's answer to the FAA's Motion to Compel is 

due 15 days from the date of service of the Motion to Compel. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.212(b), ."[t]he date of an act, event, or default, after which a 

designated time period begins to run, is not included in the computation of time[.]" Calculating 

15 days from December 20, 2014, ineans that the last day for the Respondent to file an answer 

would be Saturday, January 3, 2015. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.212(c), "[t]he last day of a time 

period is included in a computation oftime unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday. If 

the last day of the time period is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period runs until the 

end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday." Because January 3, 2015 is 

a Saturday, the Respondent's time for filing an answer to the FAA's Motion to Compel runs until 

Monday, January 5, 2015. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 13.205(a)(6), (8), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, 

regulations, statutory authority, and being fully advised; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. January 5, 2015 is confirmed to be the Respondent's deadline for filing a Response to 

the FAA's Motion to Compel. 

Attachment: Service List 

Page 3 of 3 
l 

J 

! SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W10001 

Mr. Christopher R. Stevenson 

Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

ONE COPY 

Office of the Regional Counsel, Southern Region 

P. 0. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

Mr. Robert P. Silverberg 

Respondent's Counsel 

Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP 

Georgetown Place, Suite 120 

1101 30th St., N.W. 

Washington, DC 20007 

TEL: 202-944-3300 

FAX: 202-944-3306 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

US. Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0291 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

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

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

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