## SERVED: April 22, 2016

.U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

·WASHINGTON, DC In The Matter Of: ) ) ) ) ) DocketNo. FAA-2015-3320 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO. Case No. 2012S0700374 Respondent



### ORDERDEEMING THEFAA'S RESPONSE TOTHERESPONDENT'S MOTION FOREXTENSION UNTIMELY AND MOOT
On April 4, 2016,**~he** Respondent, United Parcel Service Co., filed a Motion for Extension ofTime ("Motion"), pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.213(b). On April 5, 2016, an Order Granting theRespondent's Motion for Extension ofTime and Directing/Reserving OtherRelief("Order") was filed. Seven(7) days later, on April 12, 2016, the FAA filed the Complainant's Response to Respondent's Motion for Extension ofTime and Clarification ofConsent to Extention [sic] of Time ("Response"). A. BriefDiscussion The FAA's April 12, 2016 Response does not move for any relieffrom the April 5, 2016 Order. Rather, the FAA does not reference ordiscuss the April 5, 2016 Order at all, eventhough a courtesy copy ofthe Order was faxed to both the FAA and the Respondent onApril 5, 2016, the day it was issued. (Order, Cert. of.Service.) The Respondent's April 5, 2016 Motion was broughtpursuant to 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.213(b), which allows either party an opportunity to request an extension oftime from the court "notlater than 7 days before the document is due." 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.213(b). Ifa request for extension is filed within 7 days ofa deadline, the movant must provide good cause for the extensionrequest. 

### Id.A motion brought under 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.213(b) does not require the court to wait for a response from the opposing party priorto ruling on the motion. Indeed, it is presupposedthatthe movanthas either obtain an agreement for the requested extension oftime from the opposing side under 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.218(a), failed to obtain such an agreement, orthat the movanthas already utilized its opportunity for one (1) agreed extension.14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.218(a). Given the shortness oftime allowed for making the motion, it is clearthat the intent of 14 C.F.R. § 13.2l3(b) is for the court to rule on a requested extension expeditiously, based solely on the movant's request. 1The rule does not prohibit the opposing side from filing an optional response to a motion for extension, but such response may be considered only iffiled priorto the court ruling. It should also be noted that the Rules ofPractice do not mandate any specific limit on an extension period, either whenthe parties agree to an extension oftime, orwhenthe court rules on a motion for extension oftime. 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.213(a) and (b). In the instant case, the record shows that the Complaint was served byU.S. Mail on March 9, 2016. (Compl., Cert. ofService.) Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 

### §§ 13.209, 13.211, and 13.212, the Respondent's answer would have been due on orbefore April 14, 2016. OnApril 4, 2016, ten(10) days priorto its April 14, 2016 deadline for the answer, the Respondent filed its' Motion for**reli~f.** The Respondent's Motion was timely filed pursuantto 14 C.F.R. § 13.213(b). The record further reflects thatthe Court issued the Order grantingthe Respondent's Motion on April 5, 2016 (i.e., nine (9) days before the April 14, 2016 deadline for the Respondent's answer). The Order was based solely on the Respondent's materials, since the FAA had not filed any optional Response. In this April 5, 2016 Order, the Court granted the Respondent's request for an extension,2 based onthe Respondent's assertions ofparty agreement, and because the extension appeared to serve the interests ofthe parties as well as judicial economy. (Order, 1-2.)

1Forexample, an answering party responding to motions broughtpursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.218 is specifically allowed fifteen (15) days for filing a response. 14 C.F.R. § 13.21 l(e) and 14 C.F.R. § 13.218(d). This time frame must be deemed inapplicable under 14 C.F.R. § 13.213(b), since a movant may bring a motion for extension seven

, (7) days or less from a deadline, and is entitled to receive an automatic grant ofextension ifthe court fails to rule on

the motion before the expiration ofthe deadline.

2Had the Court failed to rule on the Respondent's Motion on or before April 14, 2016, the rule provides an automatic twenty (20) day extension from the April 14, 2016 deadline. 14 C.F.R. § 13.213(c). Page 2 of3Thereafter, on April.12, 2016 (i.e., seven (7) days after the Courtruled onthe Motion, and two (2) days before the original April 14, 2016 deadline), the FAA filed its Response. This Response to the Respondent's April 4, 2016 Motion for an extension oftime was untimely. Itis mootbecause the Court has already ruled upon the Motion,3 as required by 14 C.F.R. § 13.213(b). 

### B. Conclusion Pursuantto 14 C.F.R. 13.205(a)(6), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, regulations, statutory authority, and being fully advised;



### IT

### IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The FAA's Response to the Respondent's Motion for Extension ofTime is untimely and deemed moot.

Attachment: Service List

3 In some rare instances, a party may file substantive content under an improper document caption title. The Court may, at its discretion, suasponte assign the proper caption title to the document. However, in this case, the Court cannot re-caption orconsider the FAA's Response as an Inferred Motion for Reconsideration, since the FAA did not acknowledge receipt ofthe April 5, 2016 Order or discuss why such Order should be reconsidered on a potential error oflaw orfact. Page 3 of3DocketNo. FAA-2016-3320 (Civil Penalty Action) 

### SERVICE LIST- BYU.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2Wl000 1

Mr. Ryan M. Landers Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Enforcement Division, Southern Team 1701 Columbia Ave College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAX: 404-305-5223 Mr. Paul Alp Respondent's Counsel Crowell & Moring LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 TEL: 202-624-2500 FAX: 202-628-5116
Judge J.E. Sullivan U.S. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (El 1-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 ONE COPY

Mr. Winston E. Miller Respondent's Counsel Frost, Brown, Todd, LLC 400 Market Street, 32°d Floor Louisville, KY 40202-3363 TEL: 502-589-0296 FAX: 502-581-1087
Ms. Meaghan G. Byrd Respondent's Counsel Alston & Byrd LLP One Atlantic Center 1201 W. Peachtree Street Atlanta, GA 30309-3424 TEL: 404-881-7245 FAX: 404-253-8510

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.