# y MICHAELB . SELIG , M.D. , FA.C.C . LifeLin e Cardiolog y •iRTMEMTG F RWIO N i P 1 - 0 0 M & R Helicopters , LLC . 281 6 0refieldRoa d Allentown , PA . 18104 

# RECEIVE D Ma y10 , 201 1 JU N H 2(J W Charle s Raley , Es q NEARIN G DOCKE T Enforcemen t Division/AGC-30 0 Offic e o fth e Chie fCounse l FA A 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Washington , D C 2059 1 Re : Failur e t o settl e th e Cas e (CfH^^^ ^ f ^ 2t^ 0 121 1 Dea rM rRaley : I woul d like t o than k

yo u fo ryou refforts , th e onl ysuc h offerin g mad e i n a 2 (two ) yea rtim e span , toward s amicabl e resolutio n fo rcas e closure . I t i s unfortunat e tha t a t thi s junctur e w e wer e stil l unabl e t o reac h agreement . T o recapitulate , you roffe rdurin g ou rconversatio n wa s t o forg o an yfin e violation , base d o n MR H financial s previousl ysubmitte d t o M s Pont o b yfax , first clas s mai l an d t o th e docket , i n January2011 , bu t fo rsom e unknow n reaso n sh e wa s unawar e o fthi s dat a as sh e admitte d i n th e telephon e conferenc e o f Marc h 25 , 201 1 befor e Judg e Yoder . Likewis e yo u agree d (correc t m e i fI a m wrong ) tha t th e initia l premis e use d fo rM s William s initiatio n o fthi s violatio n wa s base d o n M rBake rno t bein g o n an ymonitorin g program , whic h wa s alway s inaccurate . B ywa yo fou r conversation , i t appear s tha t yo u disregarde d th e salien t poin t tha t n o operation s occurre d durin g th e violatio n period . Particularl yconfusin g is th e notio n tha t yo u appea rsteadfas t i n you r resolv e t o mov e forwar d wit h inten t t o g o t o cour t t o memorializ e th e MR H violation , despit e n o financia l penalt yremuneration . Thes e action s sugges t an d foste runjus t maliciou s litigation . B ywa yo fDavi d an d Goliat h tactic s i t ca n onl y be ' depicte d as harassmen t an d intentiona l inflictio n o femotiona l distres s bein g perpetrate d b yth e no w4*^ ^ FA Aattorney . Gatewa yProfessiona l Cente r• 204 5 Westgat e Drive , Suit e 20 5 • Betfileliem , Pennsylvani a 18017-747 4 VoiceA/ M 610-868-620 0 • Fa x610-868-148 9 • Educatio n Servic e 610-868-620 3 • E-Maillifelinecard@verizon.ne tSinc e thi s cos e clearl ylack s substanc e an d i s non-meritorious , I as k yo u onc e agai n t o ac t judiciousl yb yimmediatel yclosin g thi s case , as strongl yurge d b yJudg e Yoder , wherei n h e state d tha t "thi s i s "on e o fth e leas t sensibl e case s h e ha s see n i n 35 year s o fbein g a judge" . I woul d hop e tha t i n th e spiri t o f immediat e resolution , yo u wil l magnanimousl yconcu rwit h th e honorabl e judg e an d clos e thi s case . Your s Sincerely , Michae l Selig , MD , FACC , CFI- H C : Honorabl e Judg e Yode r 

# nU.S . DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Charle s Raley , Cynthi a Dominik , Laur a Ponto , Pete rLynch , Lafony a William s Complainant s M & R Helicopters , LLC . Responden t Honorabl e Judg e Ronni e Yode r Docicet : 2010-121 1

CERTIFICAT E O F SERVIC E I HEREB YCERTIF Ytha t I hav e thi s da yserve d th e foregoin g entrie(s) : Lette rt o th e Charle s Raley , Esq . Failure t o Settl e th e Cas e upo n al l partie s o frecor d i n thi s proceeding , i n accordanc e wit h th e requirement s o fRul e 2 9 pursuan t t o 2 8 U . S . C . § 174 6 . Servic e b vfirst-clas s mail , postag e prepaid , addresse d a s follows : Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue . S W Wilbu rWrigh t Avenue-Suit e 2W100 0 Washington , D.C . 2059 1 Aft : Hearin g Docke t Clerk . AGC-43 0 LXFA X 20 2 49 3 514 2 Th e Honorabl e Ronni e A . Yode r U S Departmen t o fTransportatio n Offic e o fHearings , M-20 , Roo m E l 2-32 0 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue . S.E . Washington , D C 2059 0 L^k X 20 2 36 6 753 6 Laur a Ponto , Bq . Enforcemen t Division/AGC-30 0 Offic e o fth e Chie fCounse l FA A 80 0 Independenc e Avenue . S W Washington . D C 2059 1 ^ ^ FA X 20 2 26 7 510 6 

# i^y a By: _ Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC . 281 6 0refieldRoa d Allentown . Pa . 1810 4 61 0 36 0 395 3 ^

M-SJ H Date : ^~^'<>'\ \05/10/201. 1 7:45P M FAX 0000 1

Jo b No . Sheet s Unsen t t*t*tttttttttttt*ttttt****t*tttt * *« * Multipl e Destination s ** * 020 2 3
Sen t [ 01 ] 1202493514 2 [ 03 ] 12022G7510 8 Erro r [ 02 ] 1202366753 6 FA ADO C PONT O VODE R 

## MICHAE LB . SELIG , M.D. , F.A.C.C . LifeLin e Cardiolog y ^ M & R Helicopters , LLC . 281 6 Orefiel d Roo d Ajlentovs^n , PA . 1810

4 Ma y10 . 201 1 Charle s Raley , Es

q Enforcemen t Dlvlslon/AGC-30 0 Offic e o fth e Chie fCounse l FA A 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Washington , D C 2059 1 Re : Failur e t o Settl e tti e Cas e Dea rM rRaley : I woul d like t o than k

yo u fo ryou refforts , th e onl ysuc h offerin g mad e i n a 2 (two ) yea rtim e span , toward s amicabl e resolutio n fo rcas e closure . I t is unfortunat e tha t a t thi s junctur e w e wer e stil l unabl e t o reac h agreement . T o recapitulate , you roffe rdurin g ou rconversatio n wa s t o forg o an yfin e violation , base d o n MR H financial s previousl ysubmitte d t o M s Pont o b yfax , first clas s mai l an d t o th e docket , i n January2011 , bu t fo rsom e unknow n reaso n sh e wa s unawar e o fthi s dat a a s sh e admitte d i n th e telephon e conferenc e o f Marc h 25 , 201 1 befor e Judg e Yoder . Likewis e yo u agree d (correc t m e i fI a m wrong ) tha t th e initia l premis e use d fo rM s William s initiatio n o fthi s violatio n wa s base d o n M rBake rno t bein g o n an ymonitorin g program , whic h wa s alway s inaccurate . B ywa yo fou r

## MICHAE

LB . SELIG , M.D. , F.A.C.C . LifeLin e Cardiolog y M & R Helicopters , LLC . 281 6 Orefiel d Roa d Allentown , PA . 18104 Ma y14,201 1 

# RECEIVE D Charle s Raley , Es

q «^o-ixr-" r Enforcemen t Division/AGC-30 0 [ [EARIN G OOCKc T Offic e o fth e Chie fCounse l FA A 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Washington , D C 2059 1 1^202-267-510 6 Re : Reques t fo rFA

ARegulation s an d Procedure s fo rFA ALega l Representatio n b y Unlicense d Attorney s . Dea rM rRaley : I hav e no t receive d a respons e t o m ylette ro fMa y10 , 2011 . I remai n hopefu l tha t w e ca n stil l reac h accor d fo ra complet e dismissa l o fthi s case . This cas e fro m th e beginnin g t o en d ha s lacke d substantiv e meri t tha t MR H willfull yo r wittingl ybreache d a regulation . Also , durin g th e cours e o fthi s litigatio n i t appear s tha t M s Pont o abuse d he rdiscretio n i n he rfinding s o ffact , faile d t o bas e he rallegation s o n prope r procedura l grounds , thereb ycommittin g error s o flaw , resultin g i n he rerre d conclusion s o flaw . M s Pont o base d he rinitia l premis e fo rthi s violatio n b y insistin g tha t M rBake rwa s no t o n an ymonitorin g program , whic h wa s inaccurate . Sh e di d no t conside ro rinvestigat e th e salien t poin t tha t n o operation s occurre d durin g th e violatio n period . Sh e di d no t conside ran d the n testifie d t o Judg e Yode rtha t sh e di d no t kno wtha t th e compan yoperate d a t a loss , despit e submittin g MRHs LL C ta xreturn s t o M s Pont o b yfax , first clas s mai l an d t o th e docket , i n January2011 . Sh e redacte d th e violatio n dat e onc e sh e wa s mad e awar e tha t th e violatio n wa s sittin g fo rove r2 years , pas t th e stal e complain t rule . There wer e man yassertion s i n th e Pre-hearin g Conferenc e b y M s Pontstha t pu t he rcredibilit ya t question . Durin g th e cours e th e litigation , i t becam e apparen t tha t M s Pont o wa s unfamilia rwit h th e docke t information , inexperienced , no t a license d attorney , b ydefaul t eithe rdi d no t tak e and/o rpas s he rba rexamination . Al l request s regardin g he rspecifi ccredential s wer e denied . Forthwith , sh e recuse d hersel f Gatewa yProfessiona l Cente r• 204 5 Westgat e Drive , Suit e 20 5 • Bethlehem , Pennsylvani a 18017-747 4 VoiceA/ M 610-868-620 0 • Fa x610-868-148 9 • Educatio n Servic e 610-868-620 3 • E-Maillifelinecard@verizon.ne tfro m thi s litigation . I t appear s tha t al l pleading s (i n exces s o f100) , wer e base d

o n her-represeptation s tha t sh e wa s a salaried , license d attorne yfo rth e FAA , withou t disclosure , o n direc t reques t a s t o he rtru e status . Als o worth yo fmentio n is tha t he rpleading s lacke d countersignatur e b ya license d attorney . I challeng e th e appropriatenes s o fthes e pleading s tha t wer e entere d int o th e record . There ha s no wbee n fou rattorneys ' i n thi s case . M s Pont o no rhe r apparen t superviso rM s Dominic k wh o wa s co-counse l fo rth e FA Ai n th e hearin g o fMarc h 25 , 2011 , eve rentere d thei rentryo fappearance . M rLync h an d yo u entere d thei rappearanc e onl ya t a lat e date . Thes e pleading s hav e cos t innumerabl e ma n hour s o n bot h side s wit h a negativ e retur n o n governmen t spendin g a t th e taxpayer' s expense . Judicia l resource s hav e i n additio n bee n squandere d an d abused . Accordingly , I no wreques t tha t yo u mak e availabl e th e specifi c regulation s tha t clearl ydemarcat e th e parameter s i n whic h representatio n fo r th e FA Ai n thes e matter s ca n b e don e b ya n unlicense d attorne yunde rth e abov e circumstance s tha t is contrar yt o standar d practices . Your s Sincerely , Michae l Selig , MD , FACC , CFI- HPage 1 of 2

• From : <Charles.Raley@faa.gov>

To : "mselig " <mselig@ptcl.net > Sent : Monday , Ma

y16 , 201 1 7:0 1 A M Subject : Re : Confirmatio n ofCorrespondence Dr . Selig , I a m i n receip t ofbot h sets o fcorrespondence . Than k you . Charle s Charle s Rale

y AGC-30 0 (202 ) 267-335 7 (Office ) (202 ) 267-510 6 (Fax

) charles.raley@faa.gov

From . "mselig " <msellg@ptd.net > To : Charle s Raley/AWA/FAA@FA A Date : 05/14/201104:5 3 P M g Confirmatio n o fCorrespondenc e

Mr . Rale y Pleas e confir mtJia t

yo u hav e receive dan dreviewe dth e correspondence s date dMa y 10,201 1 an dMa y 14 , 2011 . Than k yo u Michae l Seli g From : CharlesJlaley@fea-&Q V To : mselig@ptd.ne t Sent : Thursday , Ma

y 05 , 201 1 8:1 8 A

M Subject : Notic e o

f Appearanc e Dr. Selig , Attached , pleas e findm

y Notic e o f Appearanc e inth e matte r o f M & RHelicopter , DO

T Docket No . CPlOSOOOll , FA

ACas e No . 2009SO950434 . Thank you . 5/16/201 1Michae l Selig , MD , FACC , CFI-H .

Responden t 281 6 Orefiel d Roa d Allentown , PA . 18104 

# RECEIVE D JU N 

### 1 ^ W W 

## BEARIN G DOCKE T

U.S . DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O F HEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C .
Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Connplainan t M & R Helicopters , LLC . Responden t Honorabl e Judg e Ronni e Yode r Docket : 2010-121 1

RESPONDENT'

S MEMORANDU M O F LA WSUPPORTIN G DISMISSA L O F CITATIO N AN D NOW , come s Respondent , MICHAE L B . SELIG , MD , FACC , principl e fo rM R Helicopters , LLC , (shutdow n sinc e Jun e 2007) wh o file s th e followin g Menriorandu m o fla wSupportin g Dismissa l o fCitatio n an d i n suppor t thereo f aver s as follows .^ ^ I . STATEMEN TO F FACT

S A . TH E INSPECTIO N AN D RESPONDENT' S REMEDIA L MEASURE S Th e subjec t citatio n arise s fro m a n audi t performe d o n Jul y21 , 2009 , o t M R Helicopters , LLC , (MRH ) o n Jul y21 , 200 9 b yFA AOfficers , Latony a William s an d Kimm yPoo n fo rth e initia l schedule d inspectio n a t th e join t offic e o fLifelin e Cardiolog yan d MRH . Two day s afte rth e initia l inspectio n o n Jul y23 , 2009 , FA A Officer , Ms . William s returne d alon e fo rfurthe rinspectio n o fMR H dru g consortiu m records . Ms . William s tool < a n excessiv e amoun t o ftim e i n doin g he r inspection , ove r2 hours , thereb ydelayin g Respondent' s principa l an d owner , Dr . Michae l Selig' s patien t car e responsibilities . Sh e als o insiste d tha t Dr . Seli g writ e a n "o n th e spot " lette rt o her , assertin g fact s tha t wer e no t clea ri n hi s min d a t tha t rushe d perio d i n time . A t th e tim e o fhe rinspection , Ms . William s reache d th e unfounde d conclusio n tha t mechani cEdwar d Bal<ce rwa s no t covere d unde ran yFAAMandate d drug/alcoho l testin g program . This erroneou s conclusio n wa s documente d i n he rI0 9 report . A t th e tim e o fhe rinspection , Ms . William s als o disclose d tha t ther e wa s a polic ychang e tha t occurre d i n Februar y2004 whic h require d al l A& P mechanic s t o b e o n a compan yspecifi cdru g an d alcoho l program . Durin g th e inspection . Dr . Seli g explaine d t o Ms . William s tlio t MR H tia d no t performe d por t 13 5 operation s sinc e befor e Jun e 200 7 an d thi e compan y operate d a t a loss . MR H wa s no t notifie d o rawar e o fthi s polic ychang e nor , i n fact , wa s •FA

Aoperation s inspecto rFran k Alotta . Mr . Alott a ho d performe d inspection s o f MR H facilitie s fo rfiv e year s prio rt o 200 9 an d di d no t infor m no rwa s awar e o fthi s polic ychange . I n fact , non e o fth e managemen t personne l a t th e Allentow n FSD O wer e informe d o fth e regulatio n change . I n Augus t 2009 , Responden t voluntaril yplace d Mr . Bake ro n it s ow n companie s alread yexistin g drug/alcoho l progra m an d reissue d a pre employmen t affidavi t a t Ms . Williams ' instructio n (despit e on e alread yi n hi s record ) tha t averre d h e neve rha d a positiv e drug/alcoho l tes t an d negativ e rando m testin g wa s performed , despit e no t doin g operations . M s William s wa s mad e awar e o fthes e complianc e measures , bu t sh e chos e t o pursu e th e violation , neve rth e less . B . ISSUANC E O F TH E CITATIO N O n Augus t 14 , 2009 , Ms . Williams' s lette rinforme d MR H tha t th e abov e violation s wer e unde rinvestigation . O n Jul y27 , 2010 , Responden t wa s serve d wit h a Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penalty , citin g a potentia l fin e o f$5,400.0 0 (Fift y Fou rHundre d Dollars ) fro m Laur a Pont o fo ra violatio n tha t first occurre d o n Novembe r2 , 2007 ; 8 month s pas t th e 2 year-Stal e Complain t Rul e -Statu e o f Limitations . Afte rResponden t brough t u p th e topi co fth e statut e o flimitations , th e Complainan t quickl ychange d th e initia l complain t violatio n startin g dat e t o th e late rJul y24 , 2008 , so tha t th e violatio n appeare d t o hav e bee n entere d jus t on e da ybefor e th e 2 yea rdeadline .• O n Augus t 6 , 2010 , Responden t sen t a lette rt o Ms . Pont o detailin g th e

statement s o ffact , evidenc e an d reques t fo ra n informa l hearin g alon g wit h a n affidavi t tha t Mr . Bake rha d worke d fo rAi rMethod s Corporation . Othe r documentatio n wa s sen t confirmin g tha t Mr . Bake rworke d fo rER AMe d an d Ai r Method s t o th e presen t date . O n Septembe r23 , 2010 , Ms . William s change d th e citatio n fro m Mr . Bake rallege d failur e t o b e o n an ydrug/alcoho l progra m t o hi s no t bein g o n a drug/alcoho l progra m prio rt o th e us e o fhi s services . This statemen t ha s als o alway s bee n false . O n Octobe r1 , 2010 , a n informa l telephon e hearin g wa s hel d befor e fiel d manage rMr . Frankle , attorney s Charle s Rale yan d M s Ponto . I n tha t discussion , i t wa s state d th e polic ychang e occurre d i n Januar y2004 . O n Octobe r25 , 2010 , Responden t wa s serve d wit h th e Fina l Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penalt yfo ra fin e o f$5,400.00
. O n Novembe r19 , 2010 , th e citatio n state d th e primarypremis e fo rth e complain t tha t M rBake rwa s no t o n a monitorin g progra m befor e performin g services . O n Decembe r13 , 2010 , a n amende d complain t wa s serve d t o respondent , thi s tim e changin g th e violatio n date s so tha t the ywoul d appea rt o fal l close rt o th e tw o yea rstatut e o flimitation s an d lowerin g th e fin e amoun t t o $4,400.00
.

C . FAILUR E T O SEHL E TH E CAS E O n Marc h 25 , 201 1 a telephon e Pre-Hearin g conferenc e occurre dbefor e th e Honorabl e Judg e Yode rwhe n mos t o fth e matter s wer e discussed .

M s Pont o a n unlicense d attorne yan d M s Dominik , he rsuperviso rwer e present , representin g th e FA

Adespit e neve renterin g thei rentryo fappearanc e i n thi s case . I t becam e apparen t tha t M s Pont o di d no t rea d th e docke t informatio n includin g th e ongoin g financia l losses o fMR H tha t wer e als o sen t directl yt o he r b yfirst clas s mail , b yfa xan d t o th e docket , admitte d t o suc h an d di d no t conside rtha t MR H wa s no t operationa l durin g th e violatio n perio d as wel l as man yothe rfactors . Th e Honorabl e Judg e Yode raffirme d tha t thi s cas e wa s "on e o fth e leas t reasonabl e case s h e ha d see n i n hi s 35 year s o fbein g a judge " an d firml yadvise d settlement . M s Pont o the n recuse d hersel ffro m th e cas e an d Charle s Rale yentere d hi s appearance . O n Ma y10 , 2011 , M rRale ycam e fort h wit h th e on e an d onl y settlemen t offe rb yth e agenc ytha t dismisse d al l financia l penaltie s base d o n th e financia l losses , bu t fo rresponden t t o agre e t o th e violatio n theor yt o b e entere d int o record . M s Rileywa s no t willin g t o completel ydismiss th e cas e i n it s entiret yan d willin g t o procee d t o hearin g despit e th e ongoin g cost s t o th e agenc yan d taxpayer s an d squanderin g o fjudicia l resource s a t tim e o f unprecedente d governmenta l deficits . 11 . ARGUMENT Th e subjec t citatio n shoul d b e dismisse d i n it s entiret yfo rfou rreasons . First , i t is a n unavoidabl e fac t tha t MR H wa s no t eve n i n operatio n durin g th e allege d violatio n perio d an d ha d voluntaril ycease d suc h operation s unde runde rSectio n 119.6 9 i n goo d judgmen t an d fo rth e safet yo fth e public . This

fac t is fata l t o th e citatio n an d shoul d resul t i n it s dismissa l a s a matte ro fla wi n accordanc e wit h th e Decisio n an d Orde ri n I n th e Matte ro fDavi d E . Everso n d/b/ a Nort h Valle yHelicopters , Inc. . FA AOrde rNo . 2004-5 . Th e determinativ e fac t o fRespondent' s non-operatio n durin g th e allege d violatio n perio d i s als o supporte d b yfinancia l an d th e ta xinformatio n submitte d t o th e docke t an d o f record . Second , Mr . Bake ris not , an d ha s neve rbee n a n employe e o fMRH . MR H coul d no t therefor e b e require d t o hav e Mr . Baker , a non-employee , unde r it s ow n FA

Aapprove d monitorin g progra m whe n h e wa s o n hi s primary employer s program . Third , MR H wa s no t provide d adequat e notic e o fan y change s t o th e regulations . Fourt h an d finally , th e citatio n is barre d b yth e stal e complain t rule . A . MR H HAS NOTBEE N I N OPERATIO N SINC E 200 7 RENDERIN G TH E CITATIO N MOO T Responden t decide d i n goo d judgmen t fo rth e bes t interest s an d safet yo f th e publi cunde rpar t 119.69 t o withdra wal l par t 13 5 operation s du e t o huma n factor s beyon d hi s control . A s suc h an d i n addition , MR H ha s no t ha d a qualifie d pilo t o rbee n abl e t o carryo n par t 13 5 operation s sinc e Jun e 2007 . MR H ha s als o sinc e cease d operatin g unde rth e nam e an d unde rth e certificat e numbe r thereb yrenderin g th e citatio n moot . Al l financia l account s associate d wit h MR H wer e als o closed . Regulatio n 135.255 refer s t o th e certificat e holde r"and " operator . Th e us e o fth e conjunctiv e "and " indicate s tha t th e regulatio n onl yapplie s i fa compan yi s no t just a certificat e holde rbu t als o a n operator , whic h i s on e performin g operation s o rperformin g par t 13 5 flights . I n accordanc e wit h th e Decisio n an d Orde ri n I n th e Matte ro fDavi d E . Everso n d/b/ a Nort h Valle yHelicopters , Inc. , FA AOrde rNo . 2004- 5 a s referre d t o b yJudg e Yode ri n th e telephon e hearin g o fMarc h 25 , 2011 , on e ma yno t b e cite d o rliabl e fo rallege d operation s violation s occurrin g durin g a perio d i n tim e whe n n o operation s actuall yoccurred . Becaus e MR H wa s no t i n operation , di d no t hav e a pilo t an d di d no t fl yan ypar t 13 5 flight s durin g th e relevan t perio d o f th e violation , th e citatio n must b e dismissed . Furthermore , du e t o confirme d inconsistency , confusio n an d complexit yo f thes e drug/alcoho l regulation s part s 135.25 1 an d 135.255 , the yhav e bee n "Remove d an d Reserve d effectiv e Jul y13,2009" . ^^''^ ^ -^Ac , ^^^>2>I C 'FA Ai s worlcin g o n a majo rrevisio n o fits dru g an d alcotio i testin g regulations . Give n th e complexit yo ftha t revisio n an d th e tim e i t wil l talc e t o complet e th e rulemal(in g process , th e FA Aha s conclude d tha t i n th e interi m i t make s sens e t o pul l th e existin g regulation s togethe ri n on e place' . B . MR . BAKE R I S NO

TAN D HA

S NEVE R BEE N A N EMPLOYE E O F RESPONDEN

T Th e primarypremis e fo rth e violation s o fthi s cas e rest s o n th e assumptio n tha t Mr . Bake rA& P wa s no t o n a drug/alcoho l testin g progra m whe n performin g safet ysensitiv e function s o n th e MR H aircraft . Mr . Bake rwa s an d alway s has bee n a moonlighter , fre e lance rfo rth e wor k h e di d o n MRH

s aircraf t tha toccurre d 1 da you t o feac h 2 yea rperiod . Mr . Bake rwa s no t a n employe e o f

MRH . H e di d no t wor k

regularl yfo rMRH , h e di d no t receiv e regula rpaychecks , h e wa s no t provide d healt h insurance , h e wa s no t unde rth e contro l o fMR H o rho w th e wor k wa s t o b e done , bu t worke d independentl yo n hi s ow n accord , no t unde rth e direc t contro l o fMR H as i s th e commo n la wtest . H e wa s no t subjec t t o disciplinaryaction . H e wa s no t unde ran ykin d o fcontract . Mr . Bake rha s alway s bee n a ful l tim e employe e sinc e 1996 b yth e region s Universit yMedlva cHospita l service , alway s o n a drug/alcoho l program . M rBake r wa s employe d b yHelicopter s Incorporate d i n 1996 . The ylost th e contrac t an d Keyston e Helicopter s too k the m ove ri n lat e 2006 . Severa l compan ybu yout s an d acquisition s occurre d resultin g i n Keyston e t o Seaco rt o Aerome d t o Sikorsk yt o ER AMe d (fro m Ma y1 , 2006 - Novembe r4,2007) . H e has bee n employe d b yAi r Method s Corporation , (no t Fligh t Methods ) fro m Novembe r5 , 200 7 t o th e present . M rBake ri n additio n wa s concun'entl yo n th e Nationa l Guar d drug/alcoho l progra m i n hi s capacit yas a Nationa l Guar d A& P an d Helicopte rpilot . Mr . Bake rwa s employe d full-tim e b yhi s primaryemploye rwh o provide d hi m a weekl ypaychec k an d worke d 4 0 hour

s a wee k an d receive d healt h car e benefits . H e wa s alway s o n a rando m drug/alcoho l testin g progra m withou t interruptio n b ytha t primaryemployer . Al l pertinen t allege d violations , particularl ypar t 12 1 Appendice s I an d J pertai n onl yt o "employees " o fa company , whic h Mr . Bake rwa s no t an d doe s no t includ e o rmentio n provision s o rexclusion s fo rnon-contract , fre e lanc e o r• moonlighters . A s such , th e citatio n issue d must b e rendere d invali d an d dismissed . C . MR H WA S NOTPROVIDE D ADEQUAT E NOTIC E O F AN YREGULATOR Y CHANGE S Th e regulation s relie d upo n b yComplainan t ar e no t containe d i n th e mos t commo n FA

Aboo k reference , th e FAR/AI M an d ar e no t cleari yreference d o rdisclose d i n th e signe d operatio n specifications . Thes e regulation s ar e thereb yhidden , omitte d an d conceale d makin g complianc e difficul t t o impossible . I t is no t prope ro rreasonabl e t o expec t a n operato rt o randoml yfin d tex t no t cleari ywritten , spelle d ou t i n th e complianc e statement , operatio n specification s o rFAR/AI M o rt o revie whundred s o fpage s o ftex t o n a remot e websit e t o focus , find , comprehend , compar e an d the n determin e i fa rando m chang e i n a singl e isolate d regulatio n ha d occurred . I t i s no t state d wher e th e exac t sourc e locatio n o fthes e unidentifie d an d hidde n (fin e print ) regulation s ar e t o b e locate d o ra t wha t tim e Interva l t o carr you t thi s tediou s hi t o rmis s searc h exercis e tha t i

s pron e t o misinterpretatio n an d error , therefore , i t i s impossibl e t o eve rb e completel ycomplian t a t an ypoin t i n time , i fa regulatio n change d o rupdat e occurs , withou t notifie d o rknowing , as i s cleari yevidence d b yth e histor

yo fth e FAA' s ow n officers . I t i s als o impossibl e t o d o thi s tim e consuming , rando m searc h o n a regula rbasi s an d i s mor e pron e t o mistak e an d entrapment , tha t i

s procedurall yinconsisten t wit h th e forthrigh t notificatio n procedur e tha t is i n plac e fo ral l othe rchapter s i n th e operatio n specifications , whic h use s a effective , personalized , on e o n on e approac h b yknow n an d

# i establishe d FA Ainspector s i n th e spri t o fcomplianc e an d safety . M s William s Informe d Responden t tha t th e regulatio n change s occurre d i n Februaryo f200 4 bu t th e operatio n specification s A44 9 wer e signe d of fi n Januar y2004 . MR H wa s no t informe d o fth e regulatio n chang e b yM rRoots i n

- Aprifcof^2004

TwhervMRH~underwen t it s first s FAA^drug/aleohol ^

audit rMR Kwa s nof- - Informe d during- 5 year s o fFA Aoperation s inspection s b yFran k Alotta , wa s no t inforrnec l durin g frequen t maintenanc e inspection s b yFA Ainspecto rGerry Henninger . Th e Allentow n FSD O i s locate d acros s th e stree t fro m th e MR H alrcraf fan d itiofficei^ s inspecte d frequentl yduring , thei rdail yactivitie s a t th e Lehig h Valle yInternationa l Airpor t (ABE ) wher e th e aircraf t ha s bee n hangare d fo rove r1 0 years , nbve rt o fin d MR H i h violatio n o fFA Aregulations . Th e manage r o fth e Allentow n FSDO , M rWadsworth , als o wa s unawar e o fth e polic ychange . Therefor e th e FAA' s officer s an d it s ow n dru g abatemen t office rwa s als o no t informe d o fth e regulatio n chang e jus t as MR H wa s not . Assumin g arguendo , eve n i fth e othe rdefect s wer e no t i n place , thi s scenari o o fn o on e knowin g o fth e regulatio n change , onl yencourage d th e potentia l violatio n an d unreasonabl e t o hol d th e responden t t o a standar d highe ro ra doubl e standar d tha n thei row n FA Aofficial s o rdru g inspectio n officer s wh o themselve s di d no t kno wo rinfor m MR H o fth e regulatio n change . 1 4 C.F.R . par t 121 , Appendi xI an d J an d 4 9 C.F.R . par t 4 0 ar e no t disclose d an d n o forthrigh t notificatio n procedur e wa s i n plac e t o infor m th e operato ro fthi s change , contrar yt o th e routin e protoco l follovve d b yal l othe r
10 -• operatio n specificatio n chapter s whic h include d a regula rnotificatio n

procedure , update d an d re-writte n operatio n specificatio n revisions , physicall y replace d page s an d subsequen t re-signof fan d confirmatio n o fth e ne wpage s tha t th e operato ris awar e an d agrees . I t i s therefor e no t prope ro rreasonabl e t o hol d MR H responsibl e fo rchange s h e wa s no t formall yo rotherwis e notifie d o f o rsigne d offon .

D . TH E CITATIO N MUS TB E DISMISSE D BYVIRTU E O F TH E STAL E COMPLAIN TRUL E O n Jul y28 , 2010 , Responden t wa s serve d wit h a Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penalty , citin g a potentia l fin e o f$540 0 (Fift yFou rHundre d Dollars ) fro m Laur a Pont o fo ra violatio n tha t first occurre d o n Novembe r2 , 2007 ; 8 month s passe d th e 2 year-Stal e Complain t Rul e -Statu e o fLimitations . Afte rResponden t brough t u p th e topi co fth e statut e o flimitations . Complainan t quickl ychange d th e initia l complain t violatio n usin g a startin g dat e t o th e late rJul y24 , 2008 , so tha t th e violatio n appeare d t o hav e bee n entere d jus t on e da ybefor e th e 2 yea rdeadline . However , Complainan t use d a documen t draf t dot e fo rth e violatio n o fJul y23 , 2010 , whe n th e sen/ic e dat e wa s Jul y28 , 2010 . Whe n Complainan t wa s initiall yan d repeatedl yaske d t o provid e th e postmar k informatio n o ra sen/ic e dat e fo rth e violation , i t claime d no t t o no t hav e it , despit e sendin g th e violatio n certifie d mail , retur n receip t requested . Onl ylate r afte rJudg e Yode rordere d productio n o fthi s informatio n di d complainant s produc e thi s information . This doe s no t chang e th e fac t tha t th e initia l date s cite d an d therefor e th e startin g dat e fo rth e complain t o n th e violatio n wa s -11 -Novembe r2 , 2007 , bu t th e 2 eariie rdate s ha d t o b e dedacted , retrospectivel y

i n orde rfo rth e complain t t o com e withi n th e statut e o flimitation s b yon e day . O n Septembe r23 , 2010 , M s Williams' s lette rconcernin g th e propose d violatio n allege d M rBake rwa s no t o n an ydrug/alcoho l program . This statemen t ha s als o alway s bee n false . O n Octobe r25 , 2010 , th e Fina l Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penalt ycite d th e Novembe r200 7 dat e (2 years , 8 month s later ) as th e first allege d violatio n an d state d tha t Mr . Bake rwa s no t o n MRH' s monitorin g progra m a t tim e o fhi s services . O n Novembe r19 , 2010 , th e movin g targe t complain t wa s change d an d re-crafte d t o sta yafloa t a t an ycosts , th e primarypremis e fo rth e complain t change d bac k

t o Mr . Bake rno t bein g o n an ymonitorin g progra m a t th e tim e o f performin g services , anothe rerre d statement . O n Decembe r13 , 2010 , th e complain t wa s the n amende d an d serve d t o respondent , thi s tim e changin g th e violatio n date s so tha t the ywoul d appea r t o fal l withi n th e 2 yea rstatut e o flimitations , usin g onl yth e lates t dat e o fJul y24 , 200 8 an d lowerin g th e fin e amoun t t o $4400
. Becaus e o fthi s constan t re-craftin g o fth e complain t t o fi t th e tumblin g need s o fth e moment , responden t file d a Motio n fo rProtectiv e Orde r(Februar y 6 , 2011 ) requestin g t o stabiliz e th e complain t o rrende ri t moot . This motio n i n additio n wa s ignore d an d circumvente d t o whic h a respons e wa s neve rfile d b y Complainants . 12 -_ . VII . CONCLUSIO N • Fo ral l o fth e foregoin g reason s Responden t respectfull yrequest s th e

citatio n b e immediatel yDISMISSED .
Respectfull ySubmitted , Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC , CFl-H . V^ ^ 

## Dat e ^-9-^1 1

13 -U.S . DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Charie s Raley , Cynthi a Dominik , Laur a Ponto , Pete rLynch , Lafony a William s Complainant s M & R Helicopters , LLC . Responden t Honorabl e Judg e Ronni e Yode i Docket : 2010O21 T
CERTIFICAT

E O F SERVIC E I HEREB YCERTIF Ytha t I hav e thi s da yserve d th e foregoin g entrie(s) : RESPONDENT' S MEMORANDU M O F LA WSUPPORTIN G DISMISSA L O F CITATIO N upo n alfpartie s o frecor d i n thi s proceeding , i n accordanc e wit h thi e requirement s o fRul e 2 9 pursuan t t o 2 8 U . S . C . § 1746 . Servic e b vfirst-clas s mait . postag e prepaid , addresse d as follows : Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W y/ilbu rWrigh t Avenue-Suit e 2W1000 ' Woshirigton , D.C . 20591 - Att : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 ^ A X 2024935142 " Laur a Ponto , Esq , ' Enforcemen t Dlvislon/AGC-30 0 Offic e o fth e Chie fCounse l • ' FAA' ' ^

• 80 0 independenc e Avenue , S W >W < i/F A ashingjon , D C 2059 1 FA X 20 2 26 7 510 6 Th e Honorabl e Ronni e A . Yode r^ U S Departmen t o fTransportatio n Offic e o fHearings , M-20 , Roo m El2-32 0 120 0 Ne wJerse

yAvenue . S.E . ashington , D C 2059 0 202 36 6 7536 

# X

Washi i 1/FAX2 C

^ 

# J - ^ By : Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC . 281 6 Orefiel d Road — Allentown , Pa . 1810

4 610360395 3 Date : 

## S^&o- UPage 1 o f 1

From : <Charies . Rale y@faa.gov> To : "mselig " <mselig@ptd.net > Sent : Tuesday , Ma y24 , 201 1 7:0 1 A M Subject : Re : Confirmatio n ofCorrespondence Dr . Selig , I a m i n receipt o

fyou rmemorandum . Regards , Charle s Charle s Rale

y AGC-30 0 (202 ) 267-335 7 (Office ) (202 ) 267-510 6 (Fax) Charles , raley@faa .go

v

From . To ; Date : Subject : "mselig " <rDsellg@ptd.net > Charle s Raley/AWA/FAA@FA A 05/21/201 1 05:5 3 A M Confirmatio n o fCorrespondenc e

Mr . Rale y Pleas e confir mtha t

yo u hav e receive dan dreviewe dm y memorandu mo f la w date d Ma y 20 , 201 1 Than k yo u Michae l Seli g

6/5/201 1• Michae l Selig , MD , FACC , CFI-H .

Responden t 281 6 Orefiel d Roa d Allentown , PA . 1810 4 

# MJECEIV E JU N 1 ^ zat t 

## [ fEARIN G DOCKE T

U.S . DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O F HEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C .

Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Complainan t M & R Helicopters , LLC . Responden t Honorabl e Judg e Ronni e Yode r Docket : 2010-121 1

RESPONDENT' S REPL

YTO COMPLAINANT S BRIE F AN D NOW , come s Respondent , MICHAE L B . SELIG , MD , FACC , principl e fo rM R Helicopters , LLC , (shutdow n sinc e Jun e 2007 , a singl e pilot , owner , operated ) wh o file s respons e t o th e Complainant s brie fan d i n furthe rsuppor t o fth e reques t fo rCitatio n Dismissal .

1 . MR H HAS NOTBEE N I N OPERATIO N SINC E 200 7

RENDERIN G TH E CITATIO N MOO TComplainant s erre d b ymakin g a poin t t o stat e tha t MR H ha d a n ACTIV E

(emphasi s added ) certificate . Ho wcoul d th e operatio n b e activ e i fi t wa s unabl e t o carryou t operation s becaus e ther e wa s n o qualifie d pilot ? Responden t decide d i n goo d judgmen t fo rth e bes t interest s an d safet yo fth e publi cunde r par t 119.69 t o withdra wal l par t 13 5 operation s du e t o huma n factor s beyon d hi s control . Complainant s trie d t o asser t i n referenc e I n tti e Matte ro fDavi d E . Everso n d/b/ a Nortt i Valle yHelicopters , Inc. , FA AOrde rNo . 2004- 5 tha t no t performin g operation s prio rt o commencin g a drug/alcoho l program s i s differen t tha t no t doin g operation s durin g a perio d o fshutdow n whe n th e agenc ysough t a violatio n an d persiste d a t al l cost s t o th e taxpaye ri n tha t violation . I n th e Everso n cas e a progra m wa s mandate d t o b e starte d 60 day s afte rapprova l o fth e progra m prio rt o commencin g operation s whic h apparentl ywa s no t done . O n inspectio n o fhi s operation s specification s n o dru g progra m wa s i n place . Th e cas e wa s stil l dismissed . Th e commonalit ybetwee n th e Everso n cas e an d MRH s cas e is tha t n o operation s wer e bein g don e durin g th e relevan t period . Therefore , n o presume d ris k wa s presente d t o th e public . Th e primar ypremis e tha t initiate d th e violatio n wa s tha t M rBake rwa s no t o n an yprogram . MR H di d hav e a dru g progra m an d implemente d tha t progra m fo rthos e no t o n a n approve d progra m an d i n accordanc e t o th e operatio n specificatio n an d maintenanc e inspector' s ^ k knowledge , advic e an d i n goo d faith .Regulatio n 135.24 1 make s referenc e t o Fligh t Crewmember s requirement s

pertainin g t o operation s (emphasi s added ) unde rthi s part . Agai n MR H wa s no t doin g operation s a s agree d t o b yth e agency . Regulatio n 135.255 (befor e i t wa s remove d alon g wit h 135.251 ) refers t o th e certificat e holde r"and " operator . Th e us e o fth e conjunctiv e "and " indicate s tha t th e regulatio n onl yapplie s i fa compan yis no t jus t a certificat e holde rbu t als o o n operator , whic h is on e performin g operation s o rperformin g part 13 5 flights . I n accordanc e wit h th e Everso n cas e - on e ma yno t b e cite d o rliabl e fo r allege d operation s violation s occurrin g durin g a perio d i n tim e whe n n o operation s actuall yoccurred . Sinc e MR H wa s no t i n operation , di d no t hav e a pilo t an d di d no t fl yan ypart 13 5 flight s durin g th e relevan t perio d o fth e violation , th e citatio n must b e dismissed . Furthermore , du e t o confirme d inconsistency , contradictions , confusio n an d complexit yo fthes e drug/alcoho l regulation s part s 135.25 1 an d 135.255 , wit h it s referenc e t o th e appendices , the yhav e bee n "Remove d an d Reserve d effectiv e Jul y13 , 2009 " b yth e FA ARul e makers . 'FA Ai s workin g o n a majo rrevisio n o fits dru g an d alcoho l testin g regulations . Give n th e complexit yo ftha t revisio n an d th e tim e i t wil l tak e t o complet e th e rulemakin g process , th e FA Aha s conclude d tha t i n th e interi m i t make s sens e t o pul l th e existin g regulation s togethe ri n on e place' .A s i s commo n la wan d i n accordanc e wit h standar d practice s i n Administrativ e Law

"I n th e interpretatio n o ftti e languag e o fregulations , wtier e doub t exist s as t o tt) e inten t o fth e nneanin g o fth e languag e writte n an d enacte d b ya governin g body , th e languag e shal l b e interprete d i n favo ro fth e Partyan d agains t an yiniplie d extensio n o fa restriction" . Ofadditiona l not e i

s tha t th e Complainant s hav e take n th e egregiou s an d wanto n cours e o factio n t o pursu e a violatio n fo ra regulatio n tha t wa s remove d an d rescinde d i n it

s entiret yon e yea rbefor e th e Complainant s submitte d thei r complain t (emphasi s added ) wit h lac k o fcando rt o th e tribuna l i n tha t regard . These regulation s remai n a movin g target , no t propert ydisclosed , scattere d a t differen t locations , no t clearlyinterpretable , ca n no t b e understoo d b y reasonabl e person s an d i n thi s cas e wer e no t eve n know n b yMRHs FA A inspectors , th e loca l FSD O o rb yFA

Aofficia l Vincen t Roots durin g th e prio r drug/alcoho l audi t o fMRH , an d mor e recentl yidentifie d problemati cb yth e FA A Rul e makers (emphasi s added) , wh o ar e rewritin g th e regulation , thereb yholdin g MR H t o a doubl e standar d an d a highe rstandar d tha n it s ow n FA

Aofficials .2 . MR . BAKE R I S NOTAN D HA S NEVE R BEE N A N EMPLOYE E O F RESPONDENT

- MOONLIGHTER . Connplainant s cite d i n thei rbrief s tha t par t 121 , appendi xI allowe d ennployer s t o us e individual s t o perfor m safet ysensitiv e function s whil e bein g include d i n th e dru g progra m o fanothe remployer , change d "Jul y 13 , 200 9 whe n appendice s I an d J wer e re-codified"(emphasi s added) . Th e relativ e violatio n perio d therefor e allowe d us e o findividual s o n a primar yemployer s progra m (stric t proo ft o th e contrar yrequire d a t trial) . Th e primarypremis e fo rth e violation s o fthi s cas e rests o n th e assumptio n tha t Mr . Bake rA& P wa s no t o n a drug/alcoho l testin g progra m whe n performin g safet ysensitiv e function s o n th e MR H aircraft . Mr . Bake rwa s an d alway s ha s bee n a moonlighter, fre e lance rfo rth e wor k h e di d o n MRHs aircraf t tha t occurre d 1 da you t o feac h 2 yea rperiod . Mr . Bake rwa s no t a n employe e o f MRH . H e di d no t wor k

regularl yfo rMRH , h e di d no t receiv e regula rpaychecks , h e wa s no t provide d healt h insurance , h e wa s no t unde rth e contro l o fMR H o rho w th e wor k wa s t o b e done , rathe rworke d independentl yo n hi s ow n accord , no t unde rth e direc t contra ) o fMR H a s i s th e commo n la wtest . H e wa s no t subjec t t o disciplinar

/ action . H e wa s no t unde ran ykin d o fcontract . Mr . Bake rwa s employe d full-tim e b yhis primaryemployer , nationa l compan yAi rMethod s wh o provide d hi m a weekl ypaychec k an d worke d 40

' Complainants Brie

f pag e 2^ 2hour

s a wee k an d receive d healt h car e benefits . H e wa s alway s o n a rando m drug/alcoho l testin g progra m withou t interruptio n b ytha t primaryemploye ran d neve rteste d positive . Al l pertinen t allege d violations , particularl ypar t 12 1 appendice s I an d J pertai n onl yt o "employees " o fa company , whic h Mr . Bake rwa s no t an d doe s no t includ e o rmentio n provision s o rexclusion s fo rnon-contract , fre e lanc e o r moonlighters . A

s such , th e citatio n issue d must b e rendere d invali d an d dismissed . 3 . REDACTIO N AN D SPOLIATIO N O F TH E ENFORCEMEN

T INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

. O n inspectio n o fth e EI R documents , ther e wa s furthe revidenc e o f withhel d informatio n tha t wa s requeste d an d no t disclose d eariier . Complainant s di d no t describ e i n detai l th e method s use d o rspecifi cregulation s pertainin g t o specifi creferenc e section s tha t wer e corrupted . Complainant s describ e technique s i n a n evavsive , elusive , vogu e manne ran d i n generalities . Th e Complainant s faile d t o follo wstatut e as describe d i n § 552 . Publi c information ; agenc yrules , opinions , orders , records , an d proceeding s sectio n (a ) whic h states :

(2 ) Eac h agency , i n accordanc e wit h publishe d rules , shal l mak e availabl e fo rpubli cinspectio n an d copying — (A ) fina l opinions , includin g concurrin g an d dissentin g opinions , a s wel l a s orders , mad e i n th e adjudicatio n o f cases : 6
-(B ) thos e statement s o fpolic yan d interpretation s whic h liav e bee n adopte d b yth e agenc yan d ar e no t publishe d i n th e Federa l Register ; (C ) administrativ e staffmanual s an d instruction s t o staff tha t affec t a membe ro fth e public ; (D ) copie s o fal l records , regardles s o ffor m o rformat , whic h hav e bee n release d t o an yperso n unde r paragrap h (3 ) an d which , becaus e o fth e natur e o fthei r subjec t matter , th e agenc ydetermine s hav e becom e o rar e likel yt o becom e th e subjec t o fsubsequen t request s fo rsubstantiall yth e sam e records ; an d (E ) a genera l inde xo fth e record s referre d t o unde r subparagrap h (D) ; Th e complainant s remai n non-complian t t o th e orde ro fMarc h 25 , 201 1 an d therefor e shoul d b e hel d i n contempt .

4 . FINANCIA L PENALT

YNO TWARRANTE D O n Apri l 30 , 2011 , M s Pont o confirme d receip t o fMRHs schedul e C' s 2007-09 , Schedule s L,M, N a s requeste d an d as ordere d b yJudg e Yoder . M r Rale yconfirme d th e financia l losses an d o n Ma y10 , 2011 , propose d th e on e an d onl ysettlemen t offe rb yth e agenc ytha t dismisse d al l financia l penaltie s base d o n th e validate d financia l losses . Habituall ythroug h thi s litigation , Complainant s chang e thei rpositions , hav e bee n legall yinconsisten t an d willin g t o alte rwhateve rneede d fo rth e tumblin g need s o fth e moment . M rRale yno wchange s hi s position ^ claimin g tha t th e financial s fo rMR H ar e limite d whic h migh t demonstrat e a n inabilit yt o pa yth e propose d penalt ybu t goe s o n t o describ e th e Grou p I V sanction s Complainant s Pre-Hearin g Brie f pag e 17 , ^ 2 .amounts , tha t assume s th e sanctione d compan ydoe s no t hav e losses .

Durin g th e pre-hearin g conference , M s Pont o claime d sh e wa s no t awar e MR H wa s a Limite d LiabilityCorporatio n despit e th e LL C wa s o n almos t al l document s (approximatel y60 + submitte d documents ) an d ha d t o b e reminde d b yJudg e Yode rtha t M& R i s a Limite d LiabilityCorporatio n wherei n th e owner s o f thi s LL C ha s th e liabilit yprotectio n o fa corporation . Aprincipl e canno t b e hel d personall yliabl e fo ra debt . Therefore , al l informatio n clearl ydocumentin g compan ylosse

s ha s bee n provided . This informatio n serves t o furthe rconfir m th e lac k o foperation , no t havin g performe d an yflight s an d havin g n o incom e durin g an d afte rth e allege d violatio n period .
6 . FAILUR E T O SEHL E TH E CAS E O n Marc h 25 , 201 1 a telephon e Pre-Hearin g conferenc e occurre d befor e th e Honorabl e Judg e Yode rwhe n mos t o fth e matter s wer e discussed . M s Pont o a n unlicense d attorne yan d M s Dominik , he rsuperviso rwa s present , representin g th e FA

Adespit e neve renterin g thei rentryo fappearanc e i n thi s case . I t becam e apparen t tha t M s Pont o di d no t rea d th e docke t informatio n includin g th e ongoin g financia l losses o fMR H tha t wer e als o sen t directl yt o he r b yfirst clas s mail , b yfa xan d t o th e docket , admitte d t o suc h an d di d no t conside rtha t MR H wa s no t operationa l durin g th e violatio n perio d as wel l a s man yothe rfactors . Th e Honorabl e Judg e Yode raffirme d tha t thi s cas e wa s "on e o fth e leas t reasonabl e case s h e ha d see n i n hi s 3 5 year s o fbein g a judge " - 8 -• an d firml yadvise d settlement .

M s Pont o the n recuse d hersel ffro m th e cas e an d Charie s Rale yentere d hi s appearance . O n Ma y10 , 2011 , M rRale ycam e fort h as on e i n a ta g tea m o f4 agenc yattorneys , wit h th e on e an d onl ysettlemen t offe rb yth e agenc ytha t dismisse d al l financia l penaltie s base d o n th e confirme d financia l losses , i fth e responden t woul d agre e t o th e flawe d violatio n theorywit h it s procedura l moras s b e entere d int o th e record . Therefore , al l informatio n clearl ydocumentin g compan ylosses ha s bee n provided . This informatio n furthe rserve s t o confir m th e lac k o foperatio n an d incom e durin g an d afte rth e allege d violatio n period . M s Rale ywoul d no t agre e t o completel ydismiss th e cos e i n its entiret yi n goo d fait h bu t willin g t o procee d t o hearin g despit e th e ongoin g cost s t o th e agenc y an d taxpayer s an d squanderin g o fjudicia l resource s a t tim e o funprecedente d governmenta l deficits . Complainant' s needles s persistenc e an d conduc t i n thi s matte rha s bee n unreasonabl e an d outrageou s an d exceed s th e bound s tolerate d b ydecen t societ yan d ha s bee n don e willfully , maliciousl yan d deliberatel ywit h th e intent t o caus e responden t financia l damages , sever e harassment , menta l an d emotiona l pain , distress , an d anguis h an d los s o fenjoymen t o flife . Complainant s action s wer e don e wit h reckles s indifferenc e t o th e likelihoo d tha t suc h behavio rwoul d caus e suc h sever e emotiona l distress , affec t hi s practic e an d car e o fhi s cardia c patients , furthe rputtin g thos e patient s a t ris k an d wit h utte rdisregar d fo rth econsequence s o fsuc h actions . Thei ractio n als o delaye d an d tortiousl yinterfere d

wit h hi s evolvin g int o tha t business . Thi s cas e represent s malicious , frivolou s an d indiscretor yprosecution , procedura l overreaching . Th e regulatio n format , changes , lega l inconsistenc y an d fina l dedactio n 1 yea rbefor e th e complain t wa s filed , onl yencourage s violatio n entrapment , confusio n an d non-compliance . I t is antithesi s t o th e polic y o fth e FA

Afo rful l disclosure , teaching , informatio n distribution , mutua l an d clea r understandin g an d complianc e i n followin g evidenc e base d concept s i n th e spiri t o fth e publi cwel l bein g an d safety .

7 . TH E CITATIO N MUS TB E DISMISSE D B YVIRTU E O F TH E STAL E COMPLAIN TRUL E O n Jul y28 , 2010 , Responden t wa s serve d wit h a Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penalty , citin g a potentia l fin e o f$540 0 (FiftyFou rHundre d Dollars ) fro m Laur a Pont o fo ra violatio n tha t firs t occurre d o n Novembe r2 , 2007 ; 8 month s passe d th e 2 year-Stal e Complain t Rul e -Statu e o fLimitations . Afte rResponden t brough t u p th e topi co fth e statut e o flimitations . Complainan t quickl ychange d th e initia l complain t violatio n usin g a startin g dat e t o th e late rJul y24 , 2008 , s o tha t th e violatio n appeare d t o hav e bee n entere d jus t on e da ybefor e (emphasi s added ) th e 2 yea rdeadline . Thi s doe s no t chang e th e fac t tha t th e initia l date s cite d an d therefor e th e startin g dat e fo rth e complain t o n th e violatio n wa s Novembe r2 , 2007 , bu t th e 2 eariie rdate s ha d t o b e dedacted , retrospectivel yi n orde rfo rth e complain t t o com e withi n th e statut e o flimitation s -10 -b yon e day . O n Octobe r25 , 2010 , th e Fina l Notic e o fPropose d Civi l Penalt ycite d th e Novembe r200 7 dat e (2 years , 8 month s later ) a s th e first allege d violatio n as di d th e subsequen t complain t o n Novembe r19 , 2010 . O n Decembe r13 , 2010 , th e complain t wa s the n amende d an d serve d t o respondent , thi s tim e changin g th e violatio n date s so tha t the ywoul d appea r t o fal l withi n th e 2 yea rstatut e o flimitations , usin g onl yth e lates t dat e o fJul y24 , 200 8 an d lowerin g th e fin e amoun t t o $4400
. Du e t o th e constan t re-craftin g o fth e complain t t o fi t th e tumblin g need s o fth e moment , responden t file d a Motio n fo rProtectiv e Orde r(Februar y 6 , 2011 ) requestin g t o stabiliz e th e complain t o rrende ri t moot . This motio n i n additio n wa s ignore d an d circumvente d b yComplainant s ye t anothe rviolatio n o f§ Rul e 13.218(d) . CONCLUSIO N Fo ral l o fth e foregoin g reason s Responden t respectfull yrequest s th e citatio n b e immediatel yDISMISSED . Respectfull ySubmitted , 

# " . ^'^'l. Michae l B. Selig , MD , FACC , CF I Dat e -<^< ^ ^ 1 c : Congressma n Charie s Den t Senato rPot Toome y 1 1U.S . DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Charle s Raley , Cynthi a Dominik , Laur a Ponto , Pete rLynch , Lafony a William s Complainant s M & R Helicopters , LLC . Responden t Honorabl e Judg e Ronni e Yode i Docicet : 2010-121 1
CERTIFICAT E O F SERVIC E I HEREB YCERTIF Ytha t I hav e thi s da yserve d th e foregoin g entrie(s) : RESPONDENT' S REPL

YTO COMPLAINANT S BRIE F upo n al l partie s o frecor d i n thi s proceeding , i n accordanc e wit h th e requirement s o fRul e 2 9 pursuan t t o 2 8 U . S . C . § 174 6 . Servic e b yfirst-clas s mail , postag e prepaid , addresse d a s follows : Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Wilbu rWrigh t Avenue-Suit e 2W100 0 Washington , D.C . 2059 1 Att : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 ,^^AX20 2 49 3 514 2 Charie s Rale y Enforcemen t Division/AGC-30 0 Offic e o fth e Chie fCounse l FA A 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Washington , D C 2059 1 ,,^A X 20 2 26 7 510 6 Th e Honorabl e Ronni e A . Yode r U S Departmen t o fTransportatio n Offic e o fHearings , M-20 , Roo m E l 2-32 0 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue . S.E . Washington , D C 2059 0 f^^^ky ^ 20 2 36 6 753 6 

# t^% By: _ Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC . 281 6 Orefiel d Roa d Allentown , Pa . 1810 4 61 0 36 0 395 3 Date :

•Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC , CFI- H 281 6 Orefiel dRoa d Allentown , PA . 1810 4 Jun e 3,201 1 Senato r Pat Toome y 115 0 S.Ceda r

Cres t Blv d Suit e 10 1 Allentown , P A1810 3 Phone:(610)434-144 4 Fax:(610)434-184 4 Cas e Docke t

Number : 2010-121 1 www.regulations.go v Dear M r Toomey : I liv e withi nyou r

district an dI amwritin g t o yo u for you r assistanc e an dintervention . I hav e apar t

tim e operate dan dpilote dpart 13 5 Helicopte r

Ai r Charte r i nadditio nt o bein g alicense dcardiologis t

at Lehig hValle y Hospita l Network for th e las t 2 3 years . I amattachin g aBrie f

an drepl y t o Complainant' s Brie f tha t I filedint o th e docke t

tha t summarize s th e detail s o f th e issue s that

I hav e encountere dwithth e Federa l Aviatio n Administration . I hav e represente dmysel f pro-s e an dconside r

thi s cas e maliciou s prosecutoria l profilin g tha t i s ove r reachin g a

t th e ta x payers ' expense . I t i s hardt o imagin e tha t

th e governmen t

woul dspen dmor e tha nafine for anon-meritoriou s an d flawedcas e whe nWashingto ni s facin g anunprecedente ddeficit . A s require db y Publi c La w 93-579 , th e Privac y Act , I hereb y reques t an d authoriz e for

yo u t o interced e o nmy behalf , includin g th e righ t

t o revie w all appropriate d documentatio ntha t

yo u o r you r staf f deem s necessary i nconnectio nwit hth e applicatio n for assistanc e o r

an y othe r

actio nI hav e pendin g withth e FAA . I understan dthat an y document s I provid e t o yo u o r you r staf f ma y b e copie dan dforwarde dt o official s o f th e FA Afo r review . I understan dthat al l Federa l agencie s ar e allowe daminimu mo f 3 0 day s t o respon dt o congressiona l inquiries . Than k you . Your s Sincerely : 

# fVlk^L ^ Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC , CFI- HMichae l B . Selig , MD , FACC , CFI- H 281 6 Orefiel dRoa d Allentown , PA . 18104 Jun e 3 , 201 1 Offic e o f Congressma nCharli e Den t C/ 0 Casework 390 0 Hamilto nBoulevar d Suit e 20 7 Allentown , PA , 1810 3 Cas e Docke t

Number : 2010-121 1 www.regulations.go v Dear M r Dent : I liv e withi nyou r

distric t an dI amwritin g t o yo u t o for assistance . I hav e apart tim e operate dan dpilote dFA Apar t 13 5 Helicopte r

Ai r Charte r i nadditio nt o bein g a license dcardiologist . I nfact , w e me t at Lehig hValle y Hospital
- Muhlenber g at a luncheo nsevera l year s back . I amattachin g aBrie f

an drepl y t o th e Complainant s Brie f that I filedi nfederal court tha t summarize s th e detail s o f th e issue s tha t

I hav e encountere dwit hth e Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio nattorneys . I hav e represente dmysel f pro-s e an dconside r

thi s cas e maliciou s prosecutoria l profilin g tha t i s ove r reachin g a

t th e tax payers ' expense . It i s har dt o imagin e tha t

th e governmen t

woul dspen dmor e tha nafine fo r anon meritoriou s an dflawedcas e whe nWashingto ni s facin g a nunprecedente ddeficit . A s require db y Publi c La w 93-579 , th e Privac y Act , I hereb y reques t an d authoriz e Congressma nDen t t o interced e o nmy behalf , includin g th e righ t

t o revie w al l appropriate ddocumentatio ntha t h e or hi s staf f deem s necessary i nconnectio nwithth e applicatio nfor

assistanc e o r

an y othe r

actio n1 hav e pendin g withth e agenc y name d below . I understan dthat

an y document s I provid e to Congressma nDen t o r hi s staf f may b e copie dan dforwarde dt o official s o f th e agenc y liste dbelo w for review . I imderstan d that al l Federa l agencie s ar e allowe daminimu mo f 3 0 day s t o respon dt o congressiona l inquiries . Than k you . Your s Sincerely : Michae l B . Selig , MD , FACC , CFI- H

•