* * * 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

* * * * 

RECEIVED 

FEB -4 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

In the Matter of: * FDMSNo: 

FAA 2013-0717 

SAMMY DON LADYMON, JR. * 

FAA Docket CP No: 

* To Be Assigned 

* Hon. Richard C. Goodwin 

* * * * * * * 

COMPLAINANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS 

COMES NOW, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), through Counsel and 

moves the Administrative Law Judge for Judgment on Pleadings in the above case as no 

material issues of fact exist, as a matter oflaw, as to the allegations in the Complainant's 

Complaint, and as proof thereof, shows the following: 

I. 

By FAA's Complaint filed on September 4, 2013, Complainant assessed 

Respondent a civil penalty in the amount of$11,000.00, attached hereto as 

Complainant's Attachment C-1. 

II. 

On August 21,2013, the FAA withdrew his Order Assessing Civil Penalty and 

resent Complainant's Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty dated April2, 2013. The 

Complainant's Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty sent on August 21, 2013, was 

mailed to a different address in order to accomplish service on Respondent. Respondent 
requested a hearing via a letter sent to the Agency's counsel on September 3, 2013. 

However, as of this date, Respondent has not filed an answer to the FAA's Complaint. 

The FAA's Rules of Practice, 14 C.F.R. § 13.209(a), state in pertinent part, "A respondent 

shall file a written answer to the complaint, or may file a written motion pursuant to 

§13.208(d) or §13.218(±)(1-4) ofthis subpart instead of filing an answer, not later than 30 

days after service of the complaint." Additionally, 14 C.F.R. §13.209(±) explains, "A 

person's failure to file an answer without good cause shall be deemed an admission of the 

truth of each allegation contained in the complaint." 

Similarly, as Respondent has not filed an answer in this matter, the allegations 

contained in the FAA's Complaint should be deemed admitted. With all of the FAA's 

allegations deemed admitted, no material issues of fact exist as a matter of law. 

Federal Rule of Procedure 56( a) states in pertinent part, "A party may move for 

summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense - or the part of each claim or 

defense- on which summary judgment is sought. The court shall grant summary 

judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and 

the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." 

Court precedent also supports the Complainant's motion. The United States Court 

of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit explained in Holcomb v. Powell, "If there are no 

genuine issues of material fact, the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of 

law if the nonmoving party 'fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence 

of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden 

of proof at trial."'. Holcomb v. Powell, 433 F.3d 889, 895 (D.C. Circuit 2006); Celotex 

Corp v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). 
WHEREFORE, the Complainant moves the Administrative Law Judge enter 

an Order granting Complainant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, thereby 

atlirming Complainant's Complaint proposing to assess Respondent $11,000.00 for his 

violation of 14 C.F .R. §91.11, since no material issues of fact exist, as a matter of law. 

Dated: February 3, 2014 

Respectfully submitted, 

ERIC E. ANDERSON 

Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region 

By: 

Yolanda Ay'ala Bernal 

Agency Attorney 

PHONE: 817/222-5070 

FAX: 817/222-5945 or 5092 

email: Yolanda.A.Berna/@ji;w.gov 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this date the original and a copy of Complainant's Motion for 

Judgment on the Pleadings was sent by Federal Express mail, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

I hereby certify that a copy of Complainant's Motion for Judgment on the 

Pleadings was sent this date by Federal Express mail and FAX to: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E II-31 0) 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

I hereby certify that a copy of this Complainant's Motion for Judgment on the 

Pleadings was sent this date by Federal Express Mail to: 

Sammy Don Ladymon 

1706 Park Circle 

Garland, TX 75044 

Dated: February 3, 2014 
In the Matter of: 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

FAA Case No. 2011SW290137 

SAMMY DON LADYMON, JR. 

FAA Docket CP No.- To Be Assigned 

Judge Not Assigned 

COMPLAINT 

The Complainru1t files its complaint, tmder Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions, 14 CFR §13.208, and states the following: 

I. 

Respondent Sammy Don Ladymon, Jr., was advised tlnough a Notice of Proposed Civil 

Penalty that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of$11,000.00. On 

September 3, 2013, Respondent Ladymon submitted a written request for a hearing. 

II. 

1. On or about June 2, 2011, at approximately 9:30p.m., you knowingly aimed a 

beam of light from a laser pointer at a Cessna, model C 182 aircraft, operated by 

personnel from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the City of Garland, 

Texas, while they conducted surveillance in the City of Dallas, Texas. 

2. The FBI pilot was contacted by Air Traffic Control (A TC) and advised that other 

pilots were being illuminated by a laser. 

3. The FBI pilot then flew over the northem section of Garland, Texas, where he 

observed a green laser being directed at his aircraft. 

4. The FBI pilot stated the laser had been shined in his eyes causing pain. 

5. He was repeatedly illuminated by a green laser being shone in his eyes which 

blinded him resulting in his being temporarily impaired from controlling his 

aircraft safely. 

6. The berun of light from the laser interfered with the crewmember's performance 

of his duties. 
By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, you violated Section 91.11 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations), which states that no person may 

interfere with a crewmember in the perfonnance of the crewmember' s duties aboard an aircraft 

being operated. 

III. 

1. Under 49 U.S.C. §46301, Respondent Ladymon is subject to a civil penalty for 

each of the violations alleged. The maximum penalty per violation is $11,000.00. 

2. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of$11,000.00 is 

appropriate. 

Complainant respectfully requests that the administrative law judge enter an order that 

Respondent Ladymon be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of$11,000.00. 

Submitted this 4111 day of September, 2013. 

ERIC E. ANDERSON 

Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region 

By: 

Yolanda Ayala Bernal 

Senior Attorney 

Safety Enforcement Branch 

Phone: (817) 222-5070 

FAX: (817) 222-5945 or 5092 

e-mail: Yofanda.A.Bernaf(c!Jfiw.gov 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that the foregoing Complaint has been mailed this date by Certified Mail, Return 

Receipt Requested and by FAX, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2WIOOO 

TEL: (202) 385-8229 

FAX: (202) 493-5142 

and by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested to: 

Mr. Sammy Don Ladymon, Jr. 

1706 Park Circle 

Garland, TX 75044 

Sy.J; ia C. Twa, Paralegal Specialist 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region 

Date: September 4, 2013