### US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OFHEARINGS WASHINGTON DC IN THE MATTER OF: 

# RECEIVED EXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS INC. Hereinknown as the Respondent; FDMS NO.: FAA-2015-1322 (Civil Penalty Action) Case No. 2015NM730008 

## DEC 1 52015 HEARING DOCKET

RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TOFAA'S SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 MOTION.

Notice is hereby given that Samuel K. Burlum, 

### Sui Juris, Petitioner Defendant, in proper person, on behalf of EXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS, INC., above named, hereby makes the following MOTION before THE HONORABLE JUDGE J.E. SULLIVAN, U.S. Administrative Law Judge, Office ofHearings, M-20, U.S. Department ofTransportation, in the order entered in this matter in 2015. This order has been entered in the docket as evidenced by the official court record. 

### THIS MOTION FOR REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY OF OATH OF OFFICE 

### in "the MATTER" 

### ofEXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS, FDMS NO.: FAA-2015-1322 (Civil Penalty Action), Case No. 2015NM730008, known herein as 

### "the MATTER" or ''this MATTER", here byrequest; 

### WHEREAS: FAA'S claim ofthe RESPONDENT failed to respond AND the FAA MOTIONS should be DENIED and/or VACATED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS stated herein; AND the Respondent as the Court for this Consideration in this matter, under the Good Cause Standard; 

### WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT did in-fact respond to the FAA's June 9· 2015 complaint in a prior submitted response, in the document served to Cheryl M. Jones, Senior Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel, FAA, in the matter referenced herein, in the document labeled, "RESPONSE

### tO tHE ALLEGEAtr6NS MADE IN NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY, REQUEST FOR TELEPHONIC INFORMAL COONFERENCE AND REQUEST FOR HEARING," served to the Complainant on March, 17, 2015 and received by the FAA on March 19, 2015; (SeeAttachment 1); WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT not having a clear undershiiidfug

# ofthe process ofthe Cocii·l, since the RESPONDENT is not a trained legal counsel, and is acting in a limited capacity, with limited legal knowledge, was unware that ithad to Respond to the June 9, 2015 Complaint, since the Respondent had already stated its objections and response in the documentpreviously served in March 17, 2015 and received by the FAA on March 19, 2015; (See Attachment I); therefore RESPONDENT with limited knowledge ofthe actual process in Responding, failed to do so; WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT not having the opportunity to consult with a legal representative on their behalfin this matter, and is acting in a limited capacity for reasons previously mentioned, did not have the proper guidance or information on how to properly deal with the FAA'sJune 9, 2015 Complaint, therefore RESPONDENt with limitedknowledge of the actual process in Responding; failed to do so; WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT also expressed to the FAA and its representative in this matter that it (the Respondent) was engaged in another unrelated legal matter which took priority over this Matter, and the burden ofbothmatters in litigation at the same time would create undue burden to the Respondent, thus forcing the Respondent to have to consider filing for bankruptcy and additional protections; WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT has repeatedly expressed its argument and denial of allegations withthe FAA, yetthe FAA has continually tried to take adva11lage oflhe fact thatthe Respondent has limited infom1ation, knowledge, and legal expertise in handling this matter without having the support oflegal counsel and/or advice; WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT expresses that its lack ofresponse to the AGENCY MO'flON 1'0DEEMALLEGATIONS AM11'TED ANDFORDECISION REGARDING THE VIOLATIONS, does not qualify the FAAto make a decision ofadmitted guilt on behalfofHie Respondent, in- whidi violatesthe toiistiiulioiial Rights ofthe Respondent afforded to them under the Constitution ofthe United States ofAmerica; WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT expresses that its lack ofresponse to the AGENCY MOTION TO DEEMALLEGATIONS AMITTED AND FORDECISIONREGARDING 

### tHE VIOLA!IONS; the 'Respondent has provided a list ofAffirmed Defenses in its i·espoi1se to the June 9, 2015 Complaint filed bythe FAA; WHEREAS: The FAA is attempting to try to win a decision in this Matter without having to provide any and all evidences ofproofs, proofs, documents, testimony ofwitnesses, materials, arid iiiformaiioi1 relevant to this Matter, discoui1ting ai1d violatingRights oftheRespondent; afforded to them under the Constitution ofthe United States ofAmerica; WHEREAS: The FAA is attempting to act as a self-imposed body in the capacities ofeither /and JUDGE, JURY, AND EXCUTIONER, and as the COLLECTION AGENT in this matter, and has asked the Cotirlto be an ENFORCEROF THE SELF-IMPOSED COLLEtTtoN AMOUNT also known as the Fine and/or Penalty, clearly a violation ofthe Rights ofthe Respondent; afforded to them under the Constitution oftheUnited States ofAmerica; WHEREAS: The FAA is attemptingto deem a Judgement based ontheir own arbitrary and capriciilus standards, without due pi·ocess ofthe Law, clearTy a violation ofthe Rights ofthe Respondent; afforded to them under the Constitution ofthe United States ofAmerica; WHEREAS: The FAA is providing nothing more to the courtthan its own opinion and assumptions ofthe Respondent's circumstances and situations, without all ofthe complete knowledge ofthese circumsiaii.ces aiid situations foririaJ!y disclosed fo this Coi.irt dl.lrillg 

# a conference call taken place on November, 17,2015with the Court; WHEREAS: TheFAA is providing nothing more to the courtthan its own opinion and assumptions ofthe Respondent's personal nature, without all ofthe complete knowledge ofthese circumstances and siiua1ions formally ilisdi.ised

# to this

# Court iliir1iig

# aconference call talcei1 place on November, 17, 2015 with the Court;

### WHEREAS: The Respondent has provided

# a response for good cause foi· their failure to respoi1d to the FAA's Motion, which has not yet been considered by the Court;
WHEREAS: The FAA is attempting to winthis CONTEST to strip the Respondent ofits property by way of"Papering" the Respondentwithundue burdens within unreasonable i:lmel1ries; THEREFORE, the Respondent Respectfully Submits this 

### RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO FAA'S SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 COMPLAINT to this court within the deadline imposed by the Order of the COURT; dated November 2015; reference "ORDER SETTING 

### DEADLINE FOR THR RESPONDENT TO REf>SOND AND SHOW CAUSE, AND RULING ON OTHER RELIEF; And THEREFORE, the Respondent Respectfully Request that its RIGHTS afforded to them under the CONSTITUTION ofthe United States ofAmerica, be fully observed and respected by all parties mentioned herein before this Court, and any other Court in which the Respondent's matter shall beheard; And it is said on this date, Monday,December 14, 2015, thatit has been giventhis RESPONSE to the Office ofHearings, M-20, U.S. Department ofTransportation; JUDGE J.E. SULLIVAN, also known as the HORNORABLE JUDGE SULLIVAN, also known as JUDGE SULLIVAN, also known as J.E. SULLIVAN; as to their OFFICIAL CAPICITY, as well as their INDIVIDUAL PERSONAL PRIVATE CAPTCITY, as well as any oftheir agents, appointees, employees, assistants, peers, known as the 

### "NOTIFIED PARTIES", coUedively

# or as individuals whom representthe COURT acknowledge this RESPONSE AND: MR. GLENN H. BROWN, COMPLAINTANT'S COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL COUNSEL, as well as any oftheir agents, appointees, employees, assistants, peers, known as

### the 

### ''fil(JTJFJEJJPARTlES", coHective!y or as iiidividtuils 

### whorl1 represent the COMPLAINTANT, acknowledge this RESPONSE; And it is said; The COURT has THIRTY (30) business days to respond to this RESPONSE; and failure to respond will automaticallyVACATE and DISMISS this MATTERbefore the 

### COURT; aiid the case will be disposed ofwilhotii aiiy fi11e and oi·judgirieni against

### ilic RESPONDENT, and will be disposed ofwithout PREJUDICE. Response is to be forwarded by the Courtto theRESPONDENTtothe said address provided inthe previously filed MOTION OF NOTICE OF ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE withthe Court; 

### Aiid 

### it

### is said; 

### 111e COURT has been 

### OFFICIALLY SERVED 

### tnfs MOTION 

### via

### Ui1ited States Postal Service, regular and/or priority mail; and fax;

Samuel K. Burlum Defendant; Signed and served on this date: Monday, December 14, 2015;
Notarized by:



# (-~~?« 

# - IJANlEl RTHOMAS

**f~OIARY** PUBLICOFNEWJERSEY My

**Comml:>~ion** Expires611712016

### CERTIFICATEUF SERVICE:

This DOCUMENT hereby certifies and bares witness to the actions ofSAMUEL K. BURLUM, has served proper notice to the declared parties within this DOCUMENT, has addressed these notices to the HONORABLE J.E. SULLIVAN, U.S Administrative Law Judge, on behalfofthe Office ofHearings,**M~20,** U.S Department ofTransportation; and to the office ofMr. Glenn H. Brown, 

### Complainant's Counsel, whom have been dully notified ofthis DOCUMENT, has been served through the United States Postal Service, eitherby form of regular mail and/or priority delivery; and/or fax; 

### NAME OF boctJMENt SERVED: 

### RESPONDENT'S ANSWERTO FAA'S SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 MOTION

I attest that the statement above is true and complete, and that l did in fact serve notice as to the**declaration~Jlbove,** on the Date ofMonday, December 14,2015. 

## d .f'") 

# /7 /> ,•']/ /**~//** 

# (;?)l/{ ········**.~·** J Samuel K. Burlum Respondent

Witness and Notarized 

### DANIEl

### R. THOMAS NOYARY PUBUC OF NEWJERSEY My Commlsgioo**E~plre3 &111:!01~**