RANSPORiAilON BEFORE THE 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATE] 

zCI! :^EP !2 A iOMl 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. ' 

CEfVED 

SEP - 1 2011 

DOCKET 

IN THE MATTER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA Docket No. CP 

FAA Case No. 20I0SW270072 

Judge Not YeL Assigned 

f£,^S,<^lt-^7'77 

ANSWER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

Pursuant to Rule 209 of the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions (14 • 

C.F.R. Part 13, Subpart G), Continental Airlines, Inc. ("Continental" or 

"Respondent"), i)y the undersigned, fdes this Answer to the Complaint of the Federal 

Aviation Administration ("FAA") in the above-captioned case that was served by 

certified mail on July 22, 2011, and states as follows: 

Admissions and Denials 

1. The pi'ocedural history recited in Complaint section identified as I is 

ADMITTED. 

2. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 1 are ADMITTED. 

3. ConVinontal is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 2 at this time and intends 
Answer of Continental 

Page 2 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

4. Continental is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 3 at this time and intends 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

5. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as 11 4 are DENIED, 

pending discovery in this matter. 

6. Continental ADMITS that the maximum penalty per violation under the 

regulation cited in paragraph II 4 of the Complaint is $25,000, but Continental 

DENIES that it violated the regulation cited in the Complaint, pending discovery in 

this matter, or is othei'wiso subject to a civil penalty in this case. 

7. Continental DENIES any allegation in the Complaint not specifically 

addressed in this Answer. 

Affirmative Defenses 

1. For its first affirmative defense, Continental asserts that the FAA has 

failed to state a claim upon which relief can be based. 

2. For its second affirmative defense, Continental asserts that the proposed 

civil penalty in Complaint paragraph identified as III 2 is excessive and not 

appropriate under the circumstances presented. 
Answer of Continental 

Page 3 

Relief Requested 

Continental respectfully requests that the Complaint bo dismissed with 

prejudice. 

Place of Hearing 

Continental requests that the hearing in this matter be held in Houston, Texas, 

which is a corporate office for Respondent and the place from which most Continental 

witnesses will likely be called to testify. 

Duration of Hearing 

Continental expects at this time that the hearing will last two days, but may 

take substantially longer depending on the witnesses to testify and the evidence to be 

presented. 

Respectfully submitted, 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

^^^ -

By: ^h-invK^ )]jgtvt ^ Po~^ i 

Thomas Newton Boiling 

Vice President & Associate General Counsel 

August 2G, 2011 
X 

-Answer of Continental 

Page 4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERWCE 

1 certify that on this 26'-'i day of August 2011, I caused a true copy of the 

foregoing Answer to be served: 

by U.S. certified mail (original and one copy), return receipt requested, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

and l)y U.S. certified mail, return receipt requested, to: 

Tim Duff, Attorney 

Office of Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

2601 Meacham Boulevard 

Fort Worth, TX 7(-;i37-4298