BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

WASHINGTON , D.C . Join t Applicatio n o f AMERICA N AIRLINES , INC . BRITIS H AIRWAY S PL C FINNAI R OYJ IBERI ALINEA S AEREA S D E ESPANA , S.A . ROYA L JORDANIA N AIRLINE S unde r4 9 U.S.C . § § 4130 8 an d 4130 9 fo r approva l o fan d antitrus t immunit yfo r allianc e agreemen t Docke t DOT-OST-2008-025 2

MOTIO N FO R LEAV E T O FIL E AN D REPL Y O F VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S Communication s wit h respec t t o thi s documen t shoul d b e directe d to : Jil l Brad y Genera l Counse l VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAYS , LTD . Th e Office , Mano rRoya l Crawley , Wes t Susse xRH1 0 9N U Unite d Kingdo m Anit a M
. Mosne r Soph yChe n HOLLAN D & KNIGH TLL P 209 9 Pennsylvani a Avenu e NW , Suit e 10 0 Washington , D C 20006-680 1 Phone : (202)419-260 4 Fax : (202 ) 955-556 4 Email : anita.mosner@hklaw.co m Email : sophy.chen@hklaw.co m Attorney s fo r VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S LTD . Date : January20 , 201 0BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

WASHINGTON , D.C . Join t Applicatio n o f AMERICA N AIRLINES , INC . BRITIS H AIRWAY S PL C FINNAI R OY J IBERI ALINEA S AEREA S D E ESPANA , S.A . ROYA L JORDANIA N AIRLINE S unde r4 9 U.S.C . § § 4130 8 an d 4130 9 fo r approva l o fan d antitrus t immunit yfo r allianc e agreemen t Docke t DOT-OST-2008-025 2

MOTIO N FO R LEAV E T O FIL E AN D REPL Y O F VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S INTRODUCTIO N AN D MOTIO N O n Decembe r21 , 2009 , th e U.S
. Departmen t o fJustic e ("DOJ" ) file d comment s i n thi s docke t whic h expresse d stron g concern s abou t th e competitiv e an d consume r har m tha t woul d resul t fro m th e approva l o fth e allianc e propose d byth e Join t Applicants
. O n January11 , 2010 , severa l parties , includin g th e Join t Applicants , file d length ycomment s i n respons e t o th e DO J submission
. Pursuan t t o Rul e 6 o fth e DO T Rule s o fPractice, 1 Virgi n Atlanti chereb ymove s fo rleav e t o fil e thi s verybrie fRepl yt o correc t certai n factua l allegation s mad e b yth e Join t Applicants
. A s Virgi n Atlanti cwil l explai n below , th e Departmen t mus t no t acced e t o th e Join t Applicants ' deman d tha t DO Tapprov e thei ranticompetitiv e allianc e becaus e othe r dissimila ralliance s alread yhav e receive d suc h approvals
. Thi s cas e i s clearl y

1 14C.F.R
. Par

t 302
.distinguishabl e fro m th e earlie rallianc e cases 2 tha t th e Departmen t ha s reviewed
. (Indeed , th e fac t tha t thi s allianc e ha s foundere d twic e befor e serve s onl yt o underscor e tha t point. ) Th e recor d i n thi s cas e i s replet e wit h support fo rth e position s take n byth e DO J abou t th e lac k

o facces s t o Londo n Heathrow , an d th e threa t t o competitio n pose d byth e Join t Applicatio n i s equall ywel l documented
. Accordingly , Virgi n Atlanti curge s tha t th e Join t Applicatio n b e denied
. DISCUSSIO N

•DO TShoul d Giv e N o Weigh t t o Demand s fo rRegulator y"Parity " Th e Join t Applicant s insis t tha t thei rapplicatio n mus t b e approve d t o maintai n "parity " amongs t th e globa l alliances. 3 Thi s deman d i s meritless , an d i s at odd s wit h th e statut e whic h authorize s DO Tt o gran t ATI , an d whic h require s DO Tt o mak e expres s finding s base d o n th e fact s o feac h cas e befor e it. 4 Fundamenta l t o an yairlin e allianc e revie wi s th e questio n whethe rth e propose d allianc e wil l inhibi t competitio n i n an yrelevan t market. 5 Consumer s d o no t sho p fo r "alliances, " bu t instea d bas e thei rtrave l decision s o n th e veryspecifi coption s availabl e t o the m fo reac h desire d destination
. Despit e thi s universall yaccepte d standard , th e Join t Applicant s urg e DO Tt o ignor e sever e threat s pose d byth e los s o fcompetitio n betwee n BAan d America n o n severa l ke yU.S.-Londo n Heathro woverla p markets
. Instead , the yurg e DO Tt o approv e thei rreques t i n orde rt o preserv e "regulatoryparity "
2 Fo rexample , Ai rFrance-KL M an d Sta roperate a t less-constraine d Europea n hubs , whic h allow the m to ad d bot h short-hau l fee d an d long-hau l trun k capacit yan d frequencies , oneworld , i n contrast , absolutel ycannot a t its hub , Londo n Heathrow
. 3 See, e.g., Join t Applicants ' Answe rto th e Departmen t o fJustice' s Motio n fo rLeav e an d Comment s (Jan
. 11 , 2010 ) ("Join t Answer") , a t 1-2
. 4 Virgi n Atlanti cnotes tha t United , Continenta l an d AN Ahav e applie d fo rAT I fo rthei rpropose d alliance agreemen t an d transpacifi cjoin t venture . See Docket OST-2009-0350
. I ftha t alliance wer e approve d b

yDOT , woul d oneworl d concu rwit h a n assertio n o n th e par t o fDelta an d JA L tha t approva l o

fthei ralliance mus

t be approve d i n th e interest o fmaintainin g "parity " betwee n th e Japanes e carriers ? Give n th e publi cstatements mad e b yAmerica n thu s fa r(se e discussio n below) , Virgi n Atlanti cwoul d strongl ysuspec t not . 5 4 9 U.S.C
. § § 41308 , 41309(b)
.betwee n oneworl d an d th e othe rgloba l alliances. 6 Th e Join t Applicant s refus e t o

acknowledg e tha t thei rapplicatio n i s i n n o wa yanalogou s t o it s predecessors , an d ar e i n effect urgin g DO Tt o ignor e th e statutorymandat e tha t require s eac h cas e t o b e judge d o n it s ow n merits
. Give n tha t thi s Join t Application entail s th e virtua l merge ro fth e tw o larges t player s i n th e U.S.-Londo n Heathro wmarket , wit h a n unprecedente d leve l o frout e overlaps , i t i s quit e understandabl e wh yDO J migh t b e concerne d abou t th e abilit yo f othe rcarrier s t o ente rint o thes e markets , especiall ygive n th e sever e an d persistin g constraint s o n acces s t o Londo n Heathrow
. A s Virgi n Atlanti cha s demonstrated , a gran t o fAT I woul d eliminat e competitio n betwee n th e Join t Applicant s i n a whoppin g si xU.S.-Londo n Heathro woverla p routes , an d woul d giv e th e combine d carrier s a 62 % shar e o fal l U.S.-Londo n Heathro w passengers. 7 Contraryt o claim s mad e b yth e Join t Applicants , thes e overla p market s ar e no t a t al l analogou s t o overla p market s examine d byth e DO J an d DO Ti n prio r allianc e cases . Th e market s at issu e i n earlie rcase s ar e fa rsmalle rtha n th e one s at issu e her e an d d o no t involv e airport s wit h th e massiv e infrastructur e an d slo t constraint s foun d at Londo n Heathrow
. Unlik e th e Europea n hu b airport s involve d i n othe rimmunize d alliance s suc h a s Amsterdam , Frankfurt , Munic h an d Pari s whic h hav e fe wo rn o constraints , Heathro wi s full , an d BA' s ow n chie fexecutiv e ha s repeatedl y acknowledge d tha t fact. 8

D See Note 3
. 7 See Answe ro

fVirgi n Atlanti c(Ma

y19 , 2009 ) ("Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer") , a t 37
. 8 See "Britis h Airway

s Walsh : Heathro

wFull , Mor

e Slots Eyed, " Wal l Street Journa l (Nov
. 13 , 2009) , a t http://online.wsi.com/article/BT-CO-20091113-709704.htm I (alternativel yavailabl e a t http://www.dowiones.de/site/2009/11/british-airwavs-walsh-heathrow-full-more-slots-eved.html)
. Indeed , Mr
. Wals h ha

s state d that : " I thin k

it' s wel l recognize d that Heathro wi s full , an d th e opportunit yto acquir

e additiona l slots , whil e no t impossible , i s difficult. " See RBS Repor

t Dated Novembe r16 , 2009 , Britis h Airway s Q& A(Transcript o

fth e Q& Asessio n fro m th e BA/lberi a merge rconference cal l o

fNovembe r13 , 2009) , a

t 2
.Moreove r(an d despit e th e contention s o fth e Join t Applicants) , th e uniqu e

geographi clocatio n o fLondo n Heathro wmake s connectin g service s a n ineffectiv e for m o fpossibl e competitiv e disciplin e at Heathrow , an d argument s abou t th e disciplin e tha t connectin g service s migh t offe rat othe rairport s ar e unpersuasiv e here. 9 Thes e fundamenta l truth s abou t th e U.S.-Londo n Heathro wmarke t remai n a s troublin g toda y a s the yhav e prove n t o b e i n th e othe rtw o attempt s b yth e Join t Applicant s t o secur e AT I fo rthei rallianc e activities
. Thi s dea l woul d brin g abou t th e de facto merge ro fth e tw o larges t incumbent s i n th e U.S.-Londo n Heathro wmarket , wit h th e combine d entit ywieldin g a degre e o fmarke t powe rn o othe rairlin e o rallianc e coul d match
. A s Geral d Arpey , American' s CEO , recentl yobserve d wit h respec t t o th e propose d Delta/JA Lalliance , whic h woul d resul t i n lowe rmarke t share s tha n thos e a t issu e here : "U]h e whol e desig n o fope n skie s an d immunit yi s no t t o allo wth e dominan t carrier s t o partne ran d driv e th e les s dominan t carrier s ou t o f th e market." 1 0 Virgi n Atlanti ccoul d no t agre e mor e wit h thi s contention , an d urge s DO Tt o resis t th e pressur e t o approv e thi s anticompetitiv e allianc e fo rreason s no t authorize d byth e applicabl e statute , an d solel yo n th e ground s tha t othe rles s troublesom e arrangements hav e receive d DO Tapproval
.

•Usabl e Heathro wSlot s Ar e Bot h Scarc e an d Exorbitantl yExpensiv e Th e Join t Applicant s assert tha t acces s t o Londo n Heathro wi s n o longe r problematic , an d disput e th e fac t tha t slot s at Heathro wtha t ar e usabl e fo rtransatlanti c servic e remai n bot h extremel yscarc e an d exorbitantl yexpensive
. Th e primary
9 Indeed , accordin g to a recen t CA Asurvey , onl y2 % o

fU.S.-Londo n Heathro

wpassenger

s trave l o n indirec t routing s vi a third countries
. 1 0 "America n Airlines , Partner s Ma yIncreas e $1. 1 B Offe rto JAL, " Dallas Mornin g New s (Dec
. 17 , 2009) , a t http://www.dallasnews.eom/shareclcontent/clws/bus/industries/airlines/stories/121709dnbusaaial.9f70d2.html
."evidence " cite d fo rthei rassertio n i s Virgi n Atlantic' s recen t leas e o fthre e slo t pair s t o

Ae rLingus. 1 1 A s wil l b e explaine d below , thi s short-ter m transaction i s o fn o probativ e valu e whatsoever
. Th e leas e doe s no t i n an ywa yalte rth e long-ter m fac t tha t Londo n Heathro wi s ful l an d wil l remai n s o fo rth e foreseeabl e future
. Thi s mov e wa s born e o f economi cnecessity , a s Virgi n Atlanti cwa s require d t o temporaril ycu t capacit yi n respons e t o th e curren t sever e recession
. Indeed , i fslot s at Londo n Heathro wwer e easil yobtainabl e i n eithe rth e short - o r long-ter m (a s th e Join t Applicant s posi t i n thi s Docket) 12 , Virgi n Atlanti cwoul d simpl y hav e surrendere d thos e slo t pair s t o th e slo t coordinato ran d sough t ne wone s at a late r date
. Virgi n Atlanti clease d thes e slot s t o Ae rLingu s o n a short-ter m basi s precisel y becaus e o fthei rlong-ter m scarcit yan d Virgi n Atlantic' s inten t t o retur n the m t o us e a s soo n a s economi ccondition s improve
. (I t i s notabl e tha t onl yon e o fth e thre e dail yslo t pair s a t issu e i s suitabl e fo rcompetitiv e servic e o n th e overla p route s abou t whic h DO J ha s expresse d concerns. ) Thi s leas e ha s no t materiall yaltere d Virgi n Atlantic' s U.S. - Londo n Heathro wservic e pattern , a s Virgi n Atlanti cwil l i n Summe r201 0 operat e onl y on e fewe rdail yLondo n Heathrow-U.S
. servic e tha n i t di d i n Summe r2009
. Th e large rissue , o fcourse , i s tha t Virgi n Atlantic' s pruden t short-ter m respons e t o th e recessio n ha s n o bearin g whateve ro n th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e n o ne wcapacit y at Londo n Heathro wa t an ytim e i n th e foreseeabl e future
. Th e implication s o fth e Department' s decisio n ar e o fa long-ter m an d endurin g nature . Indeed , Willi e Wals h expresse d a n interes t i n buyin g bmi' s slot s at Londo n Heathro wno t becaus e h e desire d

1 1 See , e.g., Join t Answer , a t 3
. 1 2 A s explaine d below , th e Join t Applicants hav e squarel ycontradicte d thi s clai m i n othe rfora
.t o us e suc h slot s now , bu t becaus e o fthei rlonger-ter m strategi cvalue. 1 3 Onc e BAan d

AAestablis h thei rstranglehol d ove rLondo n Heathrow , the ywil l hav e a n embedde d advantag e tha t n o carrie ro rcombinatio n o fcarrier s wil l b e abl e t o match , wit h ne wslot s an d capacit ybein g al l bu t impossibl e t o obtain
. Indeed , i t wa s Mr
. Wals h wh o pu t i t bes t whe n h e note d recentl ytha t "Heathro wi s full." 1 4 Indeed , th e claim s i n thi s docke t tha t acces s t o Londo n Heathro wi s no t especiall ycostl yo rdifficul t i s directl yundermine d b yBA' s veryrecen t offe rt o transfer slot s at Heathro wt o Japa n Airlines , s o tha t th e carrie rmigh t moun t a ne wservic e betwee n Londo n Heathro wan d Tokyo' s Haned a Airport
. Thi s offe ri s bein g hel d ou t a s incentiv e t o JA Lt o remai n withi n th e oneworl d alliance , wit h th e valu e o fth e dea l at larg e bein g place d at approximatel y$20 0 million
. Regardles s o fth e precis e valu e o fth e slo t componen t o fth e overal l package , thi s figur e speak s volume s abou t ho wdifficul t i t i s t o gai n acces s t o well-time d Heathro wslots
.

•NewEntryo n U.S.-Londo n Heathro wOverlap Route s i s Highl yUnlikel y Th e Join t Applicant s hav e attempte d t o discoun t th e concern s pose d byDO J abou t th e los s o fcompetitio n o n th e U.S.-Londo n Heathro woverla p route s at issu e i n thi s case . Fo rexample , th e Join t Applicant s assert tha t th e presenc e o fallianc e hub s o n eithe ro rbot h end s o fth e rout e shoul d no t b e viewe d a s a barrie rt o entryfo rcompetin g carriers. 1 5 Ye t America n blame d it s withdrawa l fro m th e Miami-Frankfurt marke t o n it s diminishe d abilit yt o compet e agains t Lufthans a fo rconnectin g traffi conc e th e United/Lufthans a allianc e wa s approved , an d despit e th e fac t tha t America n operate s i t

1 3 Commentin g o n a potentia l dea l to purchas e bmi , BA' s CE O indicate d tha t BA' s interest i n bm i was drive n b

yit s contro l o

fslots a t Heathrow
. "W

e wan t its slot positions, " Wals h said
. "B AChie f Stil l Expect

s oneworl d Immunit

yTo Pass, " Trave l Weekl y(Nov
. 9 , 2009) , a t http://www.travelweekly.com/Europe/article 3 ektid206040.aspx?rbp=1
. 1 4 See Note 8
. 1 5 See Join t Answer , a

t 25
.ow n hu b at Miami. 1 6 America n mad e a simila rclai m abou t it s Chicago-Frankfurt service ,

eve n i n ligh t o fit s hu b a t Chicago. 1 7 I n additio n t o th e fla t contradictio n note d above , th e Join t Applicant s attemp t t o pape r ove rth e threa t t o competitio n pose d bythei rallianc e wit h half-truths
. Fo rexample , th e Join t Applicant s assert tha t Virgi n Atlanti ci s no t threatene d b ycombinatio n o fAmerica n an d BAi n th e Miami-Londo n Heathro wmarket , whic h woul d b e a hub-to-hu b marke t i f th e allianc e wer e approved. 1 8 Th e Join t Applicant s assert tha t Virgin' s 27 % shar e o fth e loca l marke t prove s tha t i t i s a robus t competitor. 1 9 However , th e Join t Applicant s fai l t o addres s th e fac t tha t th e Londo n Heathrow-Miam i rout e i s characterize d b yhig h level s o f connectin g traffic. 2 0 I n a simila rvein , th e Join t Applicant s posi t tha t Delt a migh t introduc e a Boston-Londo n Heathro wservice , convenientl yignorin g th e fac t tha t Delt a droppe d a Boston-Londo n rout e jus t a fewyear s ago . Th e Join t Applicant s als o misstat e th e competitiv e threa t i n th e Chicago-Londo n Heathro wmarke t pose d b ya linku p betwee n America n an d BA
. Virgi n Atlanti crecentl y downgrade d it s operatio n t o seasona l service , i n part becaus e o fth e difficult yassociate d wit h competin g wit h thre e larg e hu b carrier s (America n an d Unite d wit h hub s at Chicago, an d BAwit h it s hu b a t Heathrow)
. I n th e fac e o fthi s larg e competitiv e challenge , th e Join t Applicant s posi t tha t Virgi n Atlanti cmigh t wel l restor e it s servic e t o year-roun d

1 6 See Writte n Testimon yo

fR.L
. Crandall , Chairma n an d ChiefExecutive Office , AM R Corporation , befor

e th e Senate Judiciar

ySubcommitte e o n Antitrust (Mar
. 19 , 1998) , a t 2
. 1 7 See Answe ro

fAmerica n Airlines , Docke t OST-1998-3552 (Mar
. 11 , 1998) , a t 6
. Thes e concern s als o hav

e bee n acknowledge d b yth e Governmen t Accountabilit yOffice
. "Severa l carrier s tol d u s that i t i s unlikel ythat a ne wU.S
. competito rwoul d attempt nonsto p service fro m Miam i o rDallas , since n o carrie rbesides America n maintain s a larg e enoug h network fro m eithe r o fthos e airports to provid e critica l fee d traffic. " GA O Testimony , T-RCE D 98-131 , "Internationa l Aviatio n Alliance s an d Thei rInfluence o n Airlin e marketin g Practices, " Testimon yo fJoh n H
. Anderson , Jr
. (Mar
. 19 , 1998) , a t 13
. 1 8 See Join t Answer , a

t 19
. 1 9 Id. 2 0 See Figur e 22 , Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , a t 56
.statu s i n orde rt o bette rcompet e agains t BAan d American. 2 1 T o th e contrary , i f

America n an d BAwer e t o combin e forces , th e carrier s woul d hav e fortres s hub s at eac h en d o fth e route , severel yexacerbatin g Virgi n Atlantic' s existin g competitiv e disadvantage
. Thi s woul d mak e th e restoratio n o fyear-roun d servic e o n th e rout e at verybes t a remot e prospect , an d th e complet e withdrawa l o fthi s servic e (wit h it s attendan t threa t t o competition ) a grea t an d growin g possibility
. Whil e th e argument s mad e b yth e Join t Applicant s abou t competitio n at Miami , Bosto n an d Chicag o severel ydistort th e truth , th e assertion s mad e abou t competitio n i n Ne wYork-Londo n Heathro wmarket s ar e beyon d credulity
. Wit h a combine d 65 % o f frequencie s i n th e JFK-Londo n Heathro wmarke t i fAT I wer e granted, 2 2 th e Join t Applicant s assert tha t the ywoul d no t hav e an ysor t o fmarke t powe ri n Ne wYork. 2 3 Th e Join t Applicant s als o mak e muc h o fth e anecdota l ne wentryi n Ne wYork-Londo n markets , ye t fai l t o meaningfull yacknowledg e tha t severa l o fth e carrier s hav e gon e ou t o fbusines s completely 2 4 o roperat e unattractiv e o rles s tha n dail yfifth-freedo m services
. Wit h bot h Ne wYor k

JF Kan d Londo n Heathro wno wsubjec t t o sever e slo t constraints , th e prospec t an ycarrier' s offerin g a timel yan d sufficien t competitiv e respons e i n tha t marke t i s sli m indeed
. CONCLUSIO N Wha t i s mos t notabl e abou t thi s cas e i s th e star k dichotom ybetwee n wha t th e Join t Applicant s ar e sayin g o n th e recor d i n thi s docke t versu s wha t the yar e sayin g i n th e pres s an d i n th e marketplace
. Fo rexample , BAan d AAi n thi s cas e clai m tha t n o

2 1 See Join t Answer , a t 17-18
. 2 2 Se e Figur e 13 , Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , a t 41
. 2 3 See Join t Answer , at 16
. 2 4 MaxJet , Eo s an d Silverje t hav e cease d al l operations
. I n fact , America n entere d th e JFK Londo n Stanste d marke t i n orde rt o compet e agains t Eos , an d suspende d it s ow n operation s shortl yafte rEo s failed
.remedie s ar e require d i n orde rt o preserv e competition, 2 5 ye t i n anticipatio n o fa n allianc e betwee n JA Lan d Delt a (a n allianc e tha t whic h woul d involv e lowe rlevel s o f marke t concentration tha n woul d th e BA/AAcombine) , America n Airlines ' CF O To m Horto n state d las t mont h tha t slo t give-up s an d rout e carve-ou t ar e insufficien t remedie s fo ra n anticompetitiv e alliance. 2 6 I n fact , Virgi n Atlanti cnote s a recen t statemen t mad e outsid e o fthi s docke t b yth e CE O o fAmerica n Airlines
. Comparin g th e prospect s o f antitrus t approva l fo rJAL-A Aversu s a potentia l JAL-Delt a tie-up , Mr
. Arpe ystated : "[T]h e JAL-America n Airline s team , whic h doe s no t hav e overlappin g flights , wil l readil y receiv e antitrus t immunity
. However , ther e woul d b e 'zer o possibility ' o fa JAL-Delt a team receivin g approval , a s th e tw o carrier s hav e mor e tha n a combine d 6 0 percen t shar e i n U.S.-Japa n flights." 2 7 I fAmerica n believe s tha t th e level s o fmarke t concentration o n th e Delta/JA Lallianc e ar e unacceptabl yhigh, 2 8 the n th e Departmen t surel ymus t rejec t th e linku p betwee n America n an d BA , whic h involve s eve n highe r level s o fmarke t concentratio n an d mor e rout e overlap s tha n thos e presente d b yth e Delta/JA Lcase .

2 5 See, e.g., Join t Answer , a t 8-10
. 2 6 See "To m Horto n Argue s American' s Cas e i n th e Tu g ofWa rfo rJapa n Airlines, " Dallas Mornin g New

s (Dec
. 2 , 2009) , a

t http://aviationbloq.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/12/tom horton-arques-americans-ca.html
. 2 7 "Investment , ope n skie s mak e oneworl d JAL' s home : Arpey, " Japa n Time s (Dec
. 17 , 2009) , a t http://search.iapantimes.co.ip/cgi-bin/nb20091217a1.html
. 2 8 Virgi n Atlanti ctake s n o positio n o n th e Delta/JA Lalliance
.Fo rth e reason s se t fort h i n DOJ' s comment s an d elsewher e i n th e record , Virgi n Atlanti crespectfull yurge s th e Departmen t t o den yth e application
. I n th e alternative , Virgi n Atlanti crequest s tha t th e Departmen t impos e th e remedie s recommende d b ybot h Virgi n Atlanti can d th e DOJ
. Respectfull ysubmitted ,
M
. Mosne r Soph yChe n HOLLAN D & KNIGH TLL P 209 9 Pennsylvani a Avenu e NW , Suit e 10 0 Washington , D C 20006-680 1 Phone:(202)419-260 4 Fax : (202 ) 955-556 4 Email : anita.mosner@hklaw.co m Email : sophy.chen@hklaw.co m Attorney s fo r VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S LTD .



### 1 0CERTIFICAT E O F SERVIC E I hereb ycertif ytha t I hav e thi s dat e serve d th e foregoin g documen t o n th e person s identifie d belo wbycausin g a cop yt o b e sen t b yelectroni cmail
. anbird@fedex.co m andrew.forman@cwt.co m aserranzana@geclaw.co m benjamin.slocum@usairways.co m bill@mietuslaw.co m bkeiner@crowell.co m blabow@omm.co m bob.kneisley@wnco.co m bruce.rabinovitz@wilmerhale.co m byerlyjr@state.go v carl.nelson@aa.com cdonley@ssd.co m cgosain@steptoe.co m cjsimpson@zsrlaw.co m cwilson@omm.co m david.heffernan@wilmerhale.co m dfisher@kelleydrye.co m dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.co m diarmuid.ryan@hammonds.co m dkirstein@yklaw.co m donna.kooperstein@usdoj.gov dvaughan@kelleydrye.co m dwight.moore@ustranscom.mi l ebailey@wileyrein.co m efaberman@wileyrein.co m gmurphy@crowell.co m howard_kass@usairways.com james.garzia@apgnet.co m jashetaylor@gibsondunn.co m jeff.ogar@aa.co m jeffrey.manley@united.co m jennifer.trock@pillsburylaw.co m jhill@dlalaw.co m jill.ptacek@usdoj.go v jim.ballough@faa.go v jrichardson@johnlrichardson.co m julie.oettinger@united.co m jyoung@yklaw.co m karine.faden@freshfields.co m kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.co m konstantinos.adamantopoulos@hammonds.co m kquinn@pillsburylaw.co m lachter@starpower.ne t leslie.abbott@wnco.co m lhalloway@crowell.co m libowd@sullcrom.co m mamaila@airfrance.f r mchopra@jamhoff.co m mcmillin@woa.co m mgerchick@gerchickmurphy.co m mgoldman@sgbdc.co m mholland@condonlaw.co m mroller@rollerbauer.co m mrosia@crowell.co m msinick@ssd.co m npeterson@wileyrein.co m paul.jasinski@ba.co m paul.yde@freshfields.co m peter.irvine@dot.go v pmurphy@gerchickmurphy.co m pmurphy@lopmurphy.co m prrizzi@hhlaw.co m pruden@asta.or g rbkeiner@crowell.co m rclayman@geclaw.co m recohn@hhlaw.co m rick.rule@cwt.co m robert.land@jetblue.co m rsilverberg@sgbdc.co m russell.bailey@alpa.or g sametta.c.barnett@delta.co m sami.sarelius@finnair.f i sascha.vanderbellen@delta.co m scott.mcclain@delta.co m sllunsford@fedex.co m thomas.bolling@coair.co m tmuris@omm.co m todd.homan@dot.go v wkaras@steptoe.co m

Soph yChe n January20 , 201 0 #910942 2 v3