02/25/201 1 15:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A+ DM S 1001/01 0

L U (-•(-; t.. U I— c\ . CT ; r (,,-. . .. . . u C : ' ,.- • UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N OFFIC E O F HEARING S ^ WASHINGTON . D.C . ^ ^ O r o I N TH E MATTE R O F i^twtlVcO ' ^ S g 0 . GERAL D W.KELLE R -^-^Q 2 ^ iB W 

# '" ^ '^lia ^ S'-"'''EARIN G DOCKE

T

" - FDM S No . FAA-2006-2586 9 > " (FA ACAS E NO . 2006-GL-13-0038 )
< - J 

### COMPLAINANT' S REPL YI N OPPOSITIO N T O RESPONDENT' S MOTIO N T O VACAT E DATE D JUL Y30 , 200 7 A S ORDERE D B YTH E FEDERA L AVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N DECSIO N MAKE R JANUAR Y11 , 201 1 No wcome s th e Complainan t i n oppositio n t o Respondent' s Motio n t o Vacat e date d Jul y30 , 200 7 a s ordere d b yth e Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Decisionmake rJanuary11 , 2011 , an d state s th e following :

STATEMEN TO F MATERIA L FACT S 1 . O n Decembe r18 , 2005 , Responden t wa s involve d i n a n inciden t onboar d Ai rTra n Ain^ay s Fligh t 63 5 a t Genera l Mitchel l Field , Milwaukee , Wisconsin . 2 . O n Jul y20 . 2006 , a s resul t o f tha t inciden t th e Complainan t issue d a Notic e of Propose d Civi l Penaltyt o th e responden t allegin g violation s o f 4 9 U.S.C . §46318 . 3 . O n Septembe r1 , 2006 , a Fina l Notic e o fPropose d Civi l penalt ywa s issue d whic h afforde d Responden t hi s appea l rights . 4 . O n Septembe r5 , 2006 \ Responden t file d reques t fo ra forma l hearin g i n thi s matter . 5 . O n Septembe r22 , 2006 , Complainan t file d it s complain t i n thi s actio n 6 . Durin g th e cours e o f th e pre-tria l pleading s i n thi s case , Responden t whil e denyin g th e Complainant' s allegations , concurrentl yadmitte d fact s concernin g tha t sam e conduct onboar d th e aircraft , whic h supporte d a violatio n o f Sectio n 121.58 0 of th e Federa l Aviatio n Regulation . Respondent

ha dals o reque."!te

daforma l hearin g ini

i Icue r daxe dAugu.s L28,200 602/25/201 1 15:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A* DM S g|002/01 0

7 . O n Jun e 7 , 2007 , th e Complainan t amende d it s complain t i n thi s actio n t o ad d th e violatio n o f Sectio n 121.58 0 o f th e Federa l Aviatio n Regulatio n (FAR) , an d additiona l factua l allegation s arisin g ou t o f Respondent' s action s onboar d Ai rTra n Airway s Fligh t 63 5 o n Decembe r18 , 2005 , i n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 13.21 4 o f th e Rule s o fPractice . 8 . Responden t objecte d t o tha t amendmen t o n th e basi s o f undu e delay , a s wel l a s assertin g th e Complainan t coul d not prov e it s allegations . 9 . O n Jul y3 , 2007 , Administrativ e LawJudg e Benki n issue d a n Order , denyin g th e Complainant' s amendmen t o f th e Complaint , an d struc k th e amendment , findin g i t unfai rt o allo wsuc h a n amendmen t eve n thoug h Sectio n 13.21 4 "may" permi t it , findin g th e additiona l allegation s insufficientl yrelate d t o th e origina l charges . Attache d a s exhibi t A . 10 . Responden t ha d objecte d t o th e amendment , bu t no t o n tha t basis . 11 . I n tha t Jul y3 , 200 7 Order , Judg e Benki n directe d th e Complainan t ,i f I t wishe d t o charg e th e Responden t wit h interferin g wit h crewmember s i n violatio n ofSectio n 121.58 0 ofth e FAR , tha t ther e wa s nothin g preventin g i t fro m withdrawin g th e pendin g complain t an d bringin g a ne wproceedin g chargin g tha t violation . 12 . I n tha t sam e Order , Administrativ e LawJudg e Benki n note d tha t th e tw o yea r"Time-bar " t o fil e th e "ne wallegations " ha d no t ru n an d th e Complainan t wa s fre e t o fil e a ne wnotic e allowin g Responden t du e proces s o n th e charge s th e Complainan t ha d sough t t o add . 13 . O n Jul y19 , 2007 , th e Complainan t i n complianc e an d relianc e upo n Judg e Benkin' s Orde rrequeste d tha t i t b e allowe d t o withdra wit s complain t withou t prejudice , s o tha t i t migh t procee d o n th e "new " charges . 14 . O n Jul y24 , 2007 , Administrativ e LawJudg e Benki n issue d Orde rgrantin g th e Complainant' s Motio n t o Dismis s [it s Complaint ] withou t Prejudice , findin g tha t ...th e righ t o f a n enforcemen t agency(o withdra wa complain t withou t prejudic e i s inheren t i n th e concep t o fadministrativ e enforcemen t o fa regulatorystatute . S o lon g a s th e applicabl e statut e o flimitation s ha s no t expired , th e agenc yi s privilege d t o withdra wit s initia l enforcemen t action s an d start anew . 15 . O n Jul y30 , 2007 , Responden t serve d a Motio n t o Vacat e an d Se t Asid e tha t Order , o n th e Complainant , th e FA Ahearin g docket , an d Judg e Benkin . 16.Tha t Motio n wa s no t serve d upo n th e FAADecisionmake ra s require d by1 4 CF R 219(d) .02/25/201 1 15:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A+ DM S il003/01 0

17 . O n Augus t 21 , 2007 , viewin g th e Respondent' s a s motio n procedurall y defective , I n relianc e upo n Judg e Benkin' s Jul y3 , 200 7 decision , th e Complainan t withdre wit s Fina l Notic e of Propose d Civi l Penalt yan d issue d a n Amende d Notic e o f Propose d Civi l Penalty . 18 . Tha t Amende d Notic e o f Propose d Civi l Penaltycharge d violatio n o f Sectio n 121 . 58 0 o f th e Federa l Aviatio n Regulations , i n additio n t o th e origina l charg e o f violatin g 4 9 U.S.C . § 46318 , 19 . O n Septembe r25 , 2007 , Responden t requeste d a n informa l conference . 20 . O n January2 , 2008 , a telephoni cinforma l conferenc e wa s hel d i n thi s matte ri n whic h th e Responden t participated . 21 . O n Marc h 26 , 2008 , th e secon d Fina l Notic e o f Propose d Civi l Penalty issued , whic h afforde d Responden t hi s appea l rights . Tha t correspondenc e wa s sen t t o hi m vi a regula ran d certifie d mail . Responden t receive d th e certifie d mai l cop yo n Apri l 2 , 2008^ , an d th e regula rmai l cop ywa s no t returned . 22 . O n Februar

y8 , 2010 . havin g receive d n o respons e t o th e Marc h 26 , 200 8 Fina l Notice , th e Complainan t issue d a n Orde rAssessin g Civi l Penalt yi n thi s case . 23 . O n Februar

y26 , 2010 , Responden t file d a "Notic e Of Appea l And/O r Reques t Fo rExtensio n O f Tim e T o Fil e A n Appeal" , whic h wa s th e firs t indici a tha t h e wishe d t o appea l tha t Fina l Notice , almos t tw o year s afte rth e Fina l notic e ha d issued . 24.O n Marc h 5 , 2010 , th e Complainan t filed a motio n t o dismis s tha t notic e of appea l o n th e basi s tha t i t wa s untimel y 25 . O n Marc h 11 , 2010 , receive d Marc h 16 , 2010 , Responden t file d a Petitio n fo rReview , An d Dismissa l O f Orde rAssessin g Civi l Penalt yAnd/O r Respondent' s Brief . 26 . O n Januar

y11 , 2011 , th e FA

ADecisionmake rvacate d Judg e Benkin' s decisio n allowin g th e Agencyt o withdra wit s origina l Complain t withou t prejudice . ARGUMEN T Ih e certifiedletie

r wa s subsequuui y rutume dT O Complainant

Counsel' s offic e Apri l 22 , 200R , havin g bL-c nopene dwit

hTh e handwritte nnotatio n"No t u Lthi s addre.5 s renirn' dl o sender " Copie s of th e "green card " mail receip t

andc-rccordo f

deliver y hav e previousl y bee

nprovide . Thi s letter

wa s sen r r o (h e same addres s lo whichal l previou s an dsub.sequen

t correspondenc e hadbee nreceive dby iho Respondeat ,02/25/201 1 15:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A* DM S lg|004/01 0

TH E ADMINSITRATIV E JUDGE' S ORDE R GRANTIN G WITHDRAWA L O F TH E COMPLAINANT' S COMPLAIN TWITHOU TPREJUDIC E WA S PROPE R I n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 13.21 4 of th e Rule s o f Practice , th e Complainan t timel yfile d a s a matte ro fright , a n amendmen t t o it s Complain t o n Jun e 7 , 2007 . Th e Complainan t objected . O n Jul y3 , 200 7 th e Administrativ e LawJudg e denie d th e Complainant' s reques t t o amen d it s Complain t i n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 13.21 4 o fth e Rule s o f Practice , findin g tha t allowin g th e Complainant' s amendmen t of th e Complaint , woul d b e unfai reve n thoug h Sectio n 13.21 4 "may " permi t it , findin g th e additiona l allegation s Insufficientl yrelate d t o th e origina l charges , an d furthe rrulin g tha t i f th e Complainan t wishe d t o charg e th e Responden t wit h th e "new " charg e of interferin g wit h crewmember s i n violatio n o f Sectio n 121.58 0 o f th e FAR , tha t ther e wa s nothin g preventin g i t fro m withdrawin g th e pendin g complain t an d beginnin g a ne wproceedin g chargin g thos e violations . I n tha t sam e Orde rJudg e Benkin , note d tha t a t tha t tim e th e tw o yea r"Time-bar " t o fil e th e "ne wallegations " ha d no t ru n an d th e Complainan t wa s fre e t o fil e a ne wnotic e allowin g Responden t du e proces s o n th e "new " charge s th e Complainan t sough t t o add . O n Jul y19 , 2007 . i n accordanc e wit h tha t Order , th e Complainan t requeste d tha t i t b e allowe d t o withdra wIts complain t withou t prejudice , s o tha t i t migh t procee d o n th e "new " charges , an d allo wResponden t du e proces s o n thos e charges . O n Jul y24 , 2007 , Judg e Benki n issue d a n Orde rgrantin g th e Complainant' s Motio n t o Dismis s [it s Complaint ] withou t Prejudice . O n Jul y30 , 2007 , Responden t serve d a Motio n t o Vacat e an d se t asid e tha t Order . O n Augus t 21 , 2007 , th e Complainan t withdre wit s Fina l Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penaltyan d issue d a n Amende d Notic e of Propose d Civi l Penalty . Give n th e Judge' s ruling , a n argumen t mayli e agains t th e statutoryallegatio n bein g recharge d sinc e i t ha d bee n asserte d i n th e previou s complaint , However , tha t argumen t doe s no t exis t wit h regard t o th e Sectio n 121.58 0 (1 4 CF R 121.580 ) violation , a s i t wa s a a s rule d byth e Judg e t o b e a ne wcharge . Th e Judge' s Order , directe d th e Complainan t t o affor d th e Responden t du e proces s o n th e ne wcharges . I n complianc e wit h tha t order , th e Complainan t sough t th e onl yavailabl e methodolog ywhic h i t believe d wa s afforde d t o i t fo r proceedin g wit h th e cas e includin g tha t charge , an d complyin g wit h th e Judge' s Order . Thu s i n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 13.218(a) . 1 4 C.F.R . § 13,218(a ) whic h provide s tha t " a partyapplyin g fo ra n orde ro rrulin g not specificall yprovide d i n thi s subpar

t shal l d o s o b

ymotion, " th e Complainan t file d a reques t tha t I t b e02/25/201 1 15:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A+ DM S 0005/01 0

allowe d t o withdra wit s Complain t withou t prejudice , t o allo wth e Responden t a n opportunit yt o respon d t o th e "new " charges . Th e Administrativ e LawJudg e despit e no t bein g explicitl yauthorize d I n th e Rule s o f Practice , fashione d a relie f equitabl e t o bot h parties , sinc e th e statut e o f limitation s o n th e "new " charg e ha d not run , tha t provide d Responden t wit h du e process . Th e Judg e allowe d th e Complainan t t o withdra wit s the n pendin g actio n an d allowe d i t th e optio n t o re-fil e i t includin g th e "new " charges . Give n th e findin g byth e Administrativ e La wJudg e tha t th e statut e o flimitation s ha d no t ru n o n th e "new " charges , th e optio n provide d b yth e Judge , a t leas t relativ e t o th e "new " charge , wa s proper ; and , despit e th e languag e o f 1 4 CF R 13.215 , th e onl ymean s h e believe d availabl e t o hi m t o equitabl yaddres s th e right s o f bot h partie s an d th e publi cinteres t i n ai rcarrie rsafety . CONCLUSIO N Th e Complainan t hereb yrequest s tha t th e Respondent' s motio n b e denied . I n th e even t tha t th e Decisionmake rshoul d determin e tha t Respondent' s motio n b e granted , an d th e Judge' s Jul y24 , 200 7 orde rvacated , th e Complainan t request s a declaratorystatemen t a s t o th e Impac t o f tha t decisio n o n th e Februar y10 , 2010 , Orde rAssessin g Civi l Penalty . Shoul d th e FA A Decisionmake rdetermin e tha t th e Februar y10 , 201 0 Orde rAssessin g Civi l Penaltyi s no t valid , th e Complainan t request s tha t i t b e permitte d t o withdra wit' s Jul y19 , 200 7 motio n t o withdra wit' s initia l Complain t i n thi s matter , an d tha t th e Decisionmake rrevie wth e Judge' s Jul y3 , 200 7 initia l decisio n denyin g th e Complainant' s reques t t o amen d it s Complaint , an d gran t tha t Amendment ; o ri n th e alternative , gran t th e Complainan t th e retroactiv e righ t t o proceed , o n it s the n timel yfile d allegation s relativ e t o th e "new " violation s o f 1 4 CF R 121.580 . Respectfull ysubmitted , 

# k Glen n L . Brow n Senio rAttorne y02/25/201 1 15:4 8 FA X 202493514 2 p^f t ^ DM S @I00G/01 0

I N TH E MATTE R O F GERAL D W . KELLE R FA ADOCKE TNO . CP06GL000 7 (Civi l Penalt yAction ) DM S No . FAA-2006-2586 9 (FA ACAS E NO . 2006-GL-13-0038 ) SERVIC E SHEE T I hereb ycertifytha t I have , thi s date , serve d th e foregoin g Complainant' s Repl y I n Oppositio n T o Respondent' s Motio n T o Vacat e Date d Jul y30 , 200 7 A s Ordere d ByTh e FA

ADecisio n Make rJanuar y11 , 2011 vi a U S Mail , t o th e followin g addresse s Origina l an d 2 copies ; Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Wilbu rWright Building—Suit e 2W100 0 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , SW . Washington , D C 20591 . Attention : Appellat e Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 . Copy : Geral d W . Kelle r 229 0 Bascom b Came l Roa d Woodstock , G A3018 9 Date d thi s 1 4 da yo f Februar y201 1 Y6|ahd a Quile s Lfitga l Technicia n FAAGrea t Lake s02/25/201 1 15:4 8 FAX 202493514 2 FAA^ OMS @1007/01 0


### JU L0 9 SERVE D JUL Y 3,J2^^^c^-,^ , J ^ U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C . I NTHEMATTE RO F GERAL D W . KELLE R FA A DOCKE T NO . CP06GL000 7 (Civi l Penalty Action ) DM S NO . FAA-2006-2586 9 ADMINISTRATIV ELA WJUDGE' S ORDE RDENYIN G MOTIO NFO RSUMMAR Y JUDGMEN T AN D STRIKIN G

"AMENDE D T O COMPLAINT' ? O nJun e 5 , 2007 , th e Responden t file damotio nfor

summary judgment , t o whic hth e Complainan t file daresponse , arguin g that ther e ar e dispute dissue s o f

materia l fac t

that preclud e me fromgrantin g th e motion . OnJun e 7 , 2007 , th e Complainan t file dadocument

style d"AMENDE D T O COMPLAINT, " whic hpurporte dt o addt o th e original complain t ane w charge , Le. , tha t

th e Respondent' s conduc t a s describe di nth e origina l complain t constitute daviolatio no f sectio n121.58 0 o f

th e Federal Aviatio n Regulation s (FAR) , whic hprohibit s an y perso nfro minterferin g "wit

ha crewmembe r

i nth e performanc e o f

that crewmember' s dutie s aboar da n aircraf t bein g operate dunde r

Par t 12 1 o f th e FAR . O nJun e 20 , 2007 , th e Respondent , wh o appear s pr o s e inthi s proceeding , file dapleadin g purportin g t o se t fort hhi s evidenc e supportin g hi s motio nfor

summary judgment . I

naddition , th e Jun e 20 , 200 7 pleadin g objecte dt o tli c Complainant' s effor t t o amendth e complain t

o nth e groun d tha t "[i] t wouldb e unfai r

t o permi t additional allegations " s o late i nth e day . Thi s orde r

dispose s o f

botho f thes e matters .02/25/201 1 15:4 8 FA X 202433514 2 FA A- ^ DM S 121008/01 0


### allegation s an dturni t

int o avehicl e for

chargin g th e Responden t with entirel y different

violations . I nthi s instance , ther e i s no t eve nth e approac h o f atime-bar

t o excus e tli e Complainant' s conduct . I f th e FA Awishe s t o charg e th e Responden t

withinterferin g withcrewmember s i nviolatio no f

§ 121.58 0 o f

th e FAR , ther e i s nothin g t o preven t i t fro mwithdrawin g thi s complain t an dbeginnin g th e proceedin g ane w withane w Notic e o f Propose dCivi l Penalt y chargin g aviolatio no f § 46318 , § 121.580 , o r

both . Fo r th e foregoin g reason s - 1 . Th e Respondent' s motio nfo r summar y judgmen t

i s denied ; an d 2 . Th e Complainant' s "Amende dt o Complaint " i s stricken . I T I S S O ORDERE D
Isaac D . Benki n Administrativ e Law Judg e+ HM ^ 01009/01 0 02/25/201 1 15:4 8 FA X 202493514 2 FA A



### SERVE D JUL Y 24 , 200 7 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C . INTHEMATTERO

F GERALD W . KXLLE

R FA A DOCKE T NO . CP06GL000 7 (Civi l Penalt

y Action ) DM S NO . FAA-2006-2586 9 ADMINISTRATIV ELA WJUDGE' S ORDE RGRANTIN G MOTIO NT O DISMIS S COMPLAIN T WITHOU T PREJUDIC E Th e Federal Aviatio nAdministratio nha s aske dm e t o allo w i t t o withdra w it s complain t

inthi s proceeding , s o that i t ca nre-institut e th e case , chargin g th e Responden t

wit hviolatio no f

th e differen

t provisio no f

th e Federa l Aviatio nRegulations . Althoug hth e Procedural Rule s make n o explici t referenc e to th e withdrawal o f

acomplain t

withou t prejudic e (se e 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.21 5 (i f agenc y attorne y withdraw s complaint , administrativ e law judg e shal l dismis s proceeding s withprejudice) ^ th e right o f anenforcement

agenc y t o withdra w acomplain t

withou t prejudic e i s inheren t

i nth e concep t

o f administrativ e enforcement

o f aregulatory statute . S o lon g a s th e applicabl e statut e o f limitation s ha s no t

expired , th e agenc y i s privilege dt o withdraw it s initia l enforcement

effort s an dstar

t anew . Inthi s instance , th e inciden t tha t allegedly gav e ris e t o th e complain t occurre donDecember

18 , 2005 . Consequently , th e agenc y i s wel l withi n th e five-yea

r statute o f

limitation s unde

r 2 8 U.S.C . § 246 2 andth e two-year limitation s perio di n1 4 C.F. R§ 13.208(d) . Thi s mean s tha t th e FA A can , i f i t chooses , initiat e another

proceedin g agains t

th e Respondent .02/25/201 1 15:4 8 FA X 202493514 2 FA A* DM S glOIO/01 0

FAA Docke t

No . CP06GL000 7 (Civi l Penalty Action ) SERVIC ELIS T ORIGINA L& ON ECOP Y Hearin g Docke t Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio a 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Att : Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Buildin g - Roo m2014^

ON ECOP Y Geral dW . Kelle r 229 0 Bascomb Carme l Road Woodstock , GA 3018 9 TET/
- (678)494-685 8 Glen nL . Brown , Attorne y Federal Aviatio nAdministratio n Regiona l Counse l (AGL-7 ) 230 0 Eas t Devo nAvenu e Des Plaines , IL60018-469 6 TEL : (847)294-731 3 FAX : (847)294-749 8 Th e Honorabl e Isaa c D . Benki n Administrativ e Law Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 New Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloo r Roo mE l 2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : (202)366-213 2 FAX : (202)366-753 6

' Servic e Mva

s b y U.S . Mai\ . FO

Tservic e inperso no

r b y expedite dcourier , us e ih c Following address : Hearin g Docket , Federal Aviatio nAdministration , 60 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W. , Wilbu r WrigiitBuildinfi-Roo m2014 , Washington , D C 20591 , Att : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 .