BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

) Kyla Thorington, et al., .) ) Complainant, ) ) v. ) ) United Airlines, Inc., and ) PrimeFlight Airline Services, ) ) Respondents. ) Docket OST-2013-0092

UNCONTESTED MOTION OF RESPONDENT PRIMEFLIGHT AIRLINE SERVICES, INC. FOR EXTENSION OF ANSWER DATE Communications with respect to this document should be sent to: Mark W. Atwood Elizabeth J. Wadsworth Cozen O'Connor The Army and Navy Club Bldg. 1627 I Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 matwood@cozen.com Counsel for Primeflight Airline Services
May 31, 2013BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

) Kyla Thorington, et al., ) ) Complainant, ) ) v. ) ) United Airlines, Inc., and ) PrimeFlight Airline Services, ) ) Respondents. ) ) Docket OST-2013-0092

UNCONTESTED MOTION OF RESPONDENT PRIMEFLIGHT AIRLINE SERVICES, INC. FOR EXTENSION OF ANSWER DATEPrimeFlight Airline Services, Inc. ("PrimeFlight"), a Respondent in the abovecited formal complaint, requests an extension of the filing date for its answer to this complaint under 49 C.F.R. § 302.405(a). PrimeFlight requests that it be given until June 20, 2013, to file its answer, for good cause as described below. On May 2, 2013, a representative of the Service Employees International Union ("SEIU") filed and served a formal complaint against United Airlines, Inc. ("United") and PrimeFlight on behalf of several employees of PrimeFlight. That company is the contractor responsible for certain passenger-handling services at Philadelphia International Airport ("PHL") on behalf of United as well as several other air carriers. The complaint alleges certain failure on the part of Southwest and PrimeFlight in training the named employees in carrying out their duties as wheelchair attendants.Under Section 302.405(a), PrimeFlight's answer to the complaint was due on

May 20, 2013. 1 Because PrimeFlight was named as a respondent in two additional DOT complaints filed by the SEIU on behalf of several other PrimeFlight employees at PHL, 2 and only recently was able to obtain counsel in this matter, PrimeFlight was unable to respond to the Complaint by the May 20, 2013, deadline. Given the extraordinary nature of facing three complaints filed with the Department at the same time, PrimeFlight respectfully suggests that good cause existed for its delay in responding. Additionally, due to the number of SEIU complaints that it is facing, PrimeFlight requests that it be granted an extension until June 20, 2013, to file an answer in this matter. This deadline will correspond with the extension date granted to PrimeFlight and US Airways in the SEIU's complaint on behalf of other PrimeFlight employees at PHL, as well as the June 20, 2013, response date requested by PrimeFlight in its pending motion to extend the answer date in OST-2013-0093 (which also concerns PrimeFlight's operations at PHL). As stated in its extension request in each of these proceedings, PrimeFlight simply cannot provide a meaningful response to the allegations without this additional time. It will need to coordinate between United Airlines personnel and its own employees in framing its answer to the complaint, which will require investigating employee records, conducting interviews, and coordinating responses amongst various levels of two large organizations. PrimeFlight intends to

1 Due dates are calculated based on the date the complaint was received. As it was sent via Express Mail, it was received the day after the date on which the certificate of service was signed.

2 See OST-2013-0091, Onetha McKnight, et al. v. US Airways and PrimeFlight at PHL, and OST-2013-0093, Frank Drum v. Southwest Airlines and PrimeFlight at PHL.

2give the Department the benefit of its best efforts on this matter, and believes it will be in

a position to do so by June 20, 2013. Counsel for Respondents has contacted the representative of the SEIU, and he has no objection to this extension. Additionally, precedent exists for granting this extension, since the Department to-date has granted all motions to extend the response time in those SEIU proceedings where requested. 3 ACCORDINGLY, PrimeFlight Airline Services submits that it has shown good cause for its failure to file a response by the initial May 17, 2013, answer deadline, as well as good cause for an extension of this response date to June 20, 2013. Respectfully submitted,


### A 

# dvt. k",-A-1-,a(„)
Mark W. Atwood Elizabeth J. Wadsworth Cozen O'Connor The Army and Navy Club Bldg. 1627 I Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 matwood@cozen.com Counsel for PrimeFlight Airline Services May 31, 2013

3 See Notice dated May 20, 2013, in OST-2-13-0091 granting US Airways and PrimeFlight an extension until June 20, 2013 to respond to the complaint; Notice dated May 20, 2013, in OST-2013-0092, granting United Airlines an extension until May 31, 2013; Notice dated May 21, 2013, in OST-2013-0093, granting Southwest Airlines an extension to June 12, 2013; Notice dated May 23, 2013, in OST-2013-0096, granting US Airways and Direct Airline Services until June 22, 2013; and Notice dated May 22, 2013, in OST 2013-0097, granting Spirit Airlines and Direct Airline Services an extension to June 5, 2013.

3CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 31st day of May, 2013, a copy of the foregoing Uncontested Motion for Extension was served via electronic mail on the parties named below in accordance with the Department's Rules of Practice:

Elizabeth J. Wadsworth

Samuel Podberesky, Esq. Conor Hanlon Lorraine B. Halloway, Esq. Gerald F. Murphy, Esq. sam.podbereskyAdot.qov conor.hanlonseiu.org lhallowaycrowell.com qmurphyPcrowell.com