Michael Selig, MD, FACC, CFI-H 

2816 0refieldRoad 

Allentown, PA. 18104 

'tH 2 2 ion 

^^RING DOCKET 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Cynthia Dominik, Laura Ponto, 

Latonya Williams 

Complainants 

M & R Helicopters, LLC. 

Respondent 

Honorable Judge Ronnie Yoder 

Federal Docket. No: 2010-1211 

MOTION TO DEFINE AND ENTER 4 TRUTHS OF ADMISSIONS 

AND NOW, comes respondent, MICHAEL B. SELIG, MD, FACC, CFI-H, 

principle for M & R Helicopters, LLC, (MRH) (non-operational since 2007) whom 

avers and files the following Motion to Define and Enter into the Record -Truths 

of Admissions by the Complainants. 

1. On January 24, 2011, respondent faxed to complainants 5 different 

Motions for Definite Statements. 

2. On February 7, 2011, respondent received by signature confirmed 

Certified Moil, a late enclosure making mention to the 5 Motions. 

3. The complainants have consistently failed to address with any 

1 
specificity any of the enumerated allegations in the pleadings. 

4. Respondents addressed statement requests collaboratively as a 

whole, claiming that "respondent has failed to set forth, in detail, any allegations 

of any particular pleading that ore indefinite or uncertain"^ No further 

statement or comment was made on the subject matter of 4 of the motions. 

5. Complainants only responded in any manner to the statement of 

evidential insufficiency addressed separately. 

6. By not addressing or specifically responding to the other 4 motions for 

definite statement, it can now be entered into the record as fact the following: 

A. THE FAA IS TRYING TO HOLD THE RESPONDENT TO A 

HIGHER STANDARD THAN ITS OWN FAA OFFICERS, THEIR 

OWN OFFICERS NOT KNOWING OR INFORMING THE 

RESPONDENT ABOUT THE NEW REGULATIONS SET FORTH 

IN FEBRUARY 2004 AND THEREBY WARRANTS THE 

DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT. 

B. THE FAA IS PURSUING A VIOLATION DURING A TIME 

THAT WHEN RESPONDENT WAS NOT OPERATIONAL, 

DOING FLIGHTS AND SHUT DOWN CAUTIOUSLY AND IN 

GOOD JUDGMENT UNDER 119.69 DUE TO HUMAN 

FACTORS BEYOND HIS CONTROL, THEREBY THE 

COMPLAINT IS MOOT, REPRESENTS PROSECUTORIAL 

OVERREACHING AND SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 

C. THE FUNDAMENTAL CAUSE OF ACTION WAS 

DEFECTIVE, WAS CHANGED AND HAS BEEN A MOVING 

TARGET ONCE ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY HAS BEEN 

REALIZED, THEREBY THE COMPLAINT IS RENDERED 

DEFECTIVE AND REPRESENTS PROSECUTORIAL 

OVERREACHING AND SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 

D. THE COMPLAINANTS HAVE FILED LATE RESPONSES 

' This is not a typographical error on the respondents part. The phrase does not proceed with any fiirther detail as to the 

subject matter of the 4 motions. 
BEYOND THE 10 DAY DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS, 

FAILED TO RESPOND TO MS DOMINIK ADMISSION TO 

LATE FILING WHEN SHE CONTACTED RESPONDENT 

DIRECTLY ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE THEREBY 

ACTING WITH MISCHIEF, LACKING CANDOR, NOT 

ACTING IN EQUITY AND THEREBY GROUNDS TO BE 

DISMISSED. 

7. Respondent alleges that complainants have responded only to 

what is convenient for them to answer, and have not responded and evaded 

the many items that may show the complainants in true their true light or show 

malfeasance. 

8. It appears that precious scarce judicial resources and governmental 

funds continue to be completely disregarded, abused and squandered by the 

complainants on a case that appears outrageous, frivolous, trivial, without merit, 

inconsistent, procedurally defective, while representing an aggressive 

prosecutorial pursuit and overreaching that lacks proper initiative, perspective or 

good judgment. 

9. The Pleadings have become voluminous; the governmental cost to 

litigate now exceeds the fine amount, not by the fault of the respondent but by 

the choice and judgment of the complainants, by ignoring, evading and 

circumventing the issues presented before them. 

WHEREFORE, the respondent prays that this Honorable Court will enter the 

following statements as admissions of truth and hereafter fact in the defense of 
this case to dismiss. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Michael 8. Selig, MD, FACC, CFI 

Date 

. i^^ 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Cynthia Dominik, Laura Ponto, 

Latonya Williams, Peter Lynch 

Complainants 

M & R Helicopters, LLC. 

Respondent 

V. 

Honorable Judge Ronnie Yoder 

Docket: 2010-1211 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

HEREBY CERTIFY that I have this day served the foregoing entrie(s): 

MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE 

"INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE" ALSO FOR MR BAKER 

ESTOPPEL BY INCONSISTENT POSITIONS 

MOTION TO DEFINE AND ENTER 4 TRUTHS OF ADMISSIONS 

upon all parties of record in this proceeding, in accordance with the requirements of Rule 29 

pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1746 . 

Service by first-class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Avenue-Suite 2WI000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Att: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

FAX 202 493 5142 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder 

US Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, Room El2-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue. S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

FAX 202 366 7536 

Laura Ponto, Esq. 

Enforcement Division/AGC-300 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

FAA 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

FAX 202 267 5106 

By: 

Michael B. Selig, MD, FACC. 

2816 Orefield Road 

Allentown, Pa. 18104 

610 360 3953 

Date: 

U7 

^-b-ii