UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

J & B Enterprises, Inc., dba Rhj^hm Shine 

Complainant 

Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority 

Respondent. 

Docket No. 16-08-07 

: • I 

;.7 

•'CD 

~^3 

—I 

ORDER c5 

Counsel for Complainant J & B, via a pleading with attached certificate of service dated 

December 11, 2008, requested an extension of time to file a Reply to the Respondent's 

Answer. Counsel for Complainant advised that Respondent's counsel refused to consent 

to an extension of time. Counsel further advised that the offices of the Minority Business 

Enterprise Legal Defense and Education Fund (MBELDEF) have been closed and that it 

is no longer in a position to intelligently represent J & B. Counsel states that the 

Complainant has retained counsel to replace MBELDEF, but did not provide the name of 

the new attorney. Counsel asserts that the extension of time would permit the new 

attorney to familiarize himself with the matter. Counsel closes with the statement that the 

extension of time is requested in order to permit J & B to retain substitute counsel. 

Counsel for Respondent submitted a response in opposition to the extension of time. 

Counsel contends that the motion should be denied and proffers that no documentation 

evidencing a substitution of counsel has been submitted. Counsel also notes that 

Complainant's counsel did not specify the length of time sought, but that the extension 

request itself was more than thirty (30) days beyond the deadline for filing a response. 

FAA typically seeks concurrence from both sides when an extension request for 

submission of pleadings is under consideration; that has not occurred here. Part 16 is 

intended to expedite substantially the handling and disposition of airport-related 

complaints, but the Rules of Practice for Federally Assisted Airport Enforcement 

Proceedings, Final Rule, 61 Fed. Reg. 53998 (October 16, 1996), do provide that an 

extension of time may be granted where necessary or appropriate for a fair and complete 

hearing of the matters before the agency. 

While the Director is sympathetic to the MBELDEF's change of circumstances, 

Complainant's counsel failed to provide an explanation for the lengthy delay in filing the 
request for an extension of time. Complainant's counsel did not state a timeframe for its 

extension, but just requested an extension of time be granted. Nor is it clear fi:om the 

extension request whether the Complainant has presently retained new counsel. If new 

counsel has been retained who is designated to be served (or will file pleadings and 

extension requests) in this proceeding, notice should be promptly submitted to the FAA 

Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket and on Respondent's counsel. 

Accordingly, Complainant's request for an extension of time is denied. The Director is 

proceeding with his investigation of the subject matter of the complaint. In rendering its 

decision, the FAA may rely entirely on the complaint and responsive pleadings. 

Randall S. Fiertz Date 

Director, Office of Airport 

Compliance and Field Operations 

'^jlhX-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January , 2009,1 caused to be placed in the United 

States mail (first class, postage paid) or personally delivered a true copy of the foregoing 

ORDER addressed to: 

Anthony W. Robinson, Esq. 

MBELDEF 

1100 Mercantile Lane, Suite 115-A 

Largo, MD 20774 

Arthur P. Berg, Esq. 

KAPLAN, KIRSCH & ROCKWELL LLP 

641 Lexington Ave., Suite 1409 

New York, NY 10022 

Thomas R. Devine, Esq. 

KAPLAN, KIRSCH & ROCKWELL LLP 

1001 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 800 

Washington, DC 20036 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

ACR-4 

Nikita Bright 

Office of Airport Compliance and Field 

Operations