1 UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORTATIO N I nth e Matte r of : ) ) QUENTO NT . BROWN) FDM S No . FAA-2011-100 9 ) Suit e 600 , Conferenc e Roo m Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n 122 0 L Street , N.W . Washington , D.C . Friday , Marc h23 , 201 2 Th e partie s met , pursuan t t o th e notice , a t 1:00p.m . ': ^;-\ ; BEFORE : HONORABL E J.E . SULLIVA Ng Administrativ e La wJudg e " ^ i- j 

### ~-^9-; S
=^>- ^ APPEARANCES : • (Vi a Telephone ) O nbehal f o f Respondent : i-. vOS% (

rv j './: ? QUENTO NT . BROWN , Pr o S e O nBehal f o f Agency : MAR K G . CAMACHO , Esquir e Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counse l Centra l Region , ACE- 7 Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio n 90 1 Locust , Roo m50 6 Kansa s City , Missour i 64106-264 1 (816)329-376 5


## AP R1 0i m 

## ^£/^R\N GDOCKE

T

Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 82

1 PROCEEDING S 2 (1:0 0 p.m. ) 3 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Quento nT . Brown . Thi s i s 4 Docke t No . FAA-2011-1109 . Toda yi s Friday , Marc h23 , 5 2 012 , an dth e partie s hav e convene db ytelephon e fo r 6 a telephon e conference . I'l l not e tha t th e Federa l 7 Aviatio nAdministratio ni s represente dbyit s attorne y 8 o f record , Mark . G . Camacho . Th e pr o s e litigant , 9 Quento nT . Brow ni s no t present , an dther e i s n o 1 0 explanatio nfo r hi s absence . 1 1 Prio r t o goin g o nth e recor dthi s afternoon , 1 2 th e lega l secretar yi nm yoffic e convene dthi s 1 3 conferenc e an dnotifie deveryon e presen t tha t sh e ha d 1 4 trie dt o cal l Mr . Brow na t hi s telephon e numbe r o f 1 5 recor dwhic hi s (321)594-8501 . Sh e wa s no t abl e t o 1 6 reach . Mr . Brown , bu t sh e di dleav e a messag e fo r hi m 1 7 remindin g hi mo f thi s conferenc e an dtha t hi s 1 8 appearanc e wa s requested . 1 9 I'l l als o not e tha t prio r t o today's;date , 2 0 mylega l secretar ycalle dMr . Brow no nMarc h19 , 201 2 2 1 a t approximatel y10:1 2 a.m . Sh e lef t hi ma detaile d 2 2 messag e advisin g hi mo f thi s telephon e conference , an d 2 3 includin g he r name , phon e numbe r an daskin g hi mt o 2 4 retur nhe r cal l i f h e ha danyquestio nabou t thi s 2 5 conference . Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n (202 ) 628-488 83

1 T o date , w e hav e no t hear dfro mMr . Brow n 2 eithe r b ytelephon e o r i nwriting . S o w e ar e goin g t o 3 procee dwithou t him . Mr . Camacho , I shoul das k yo u i f 4 yo u hav e ha dan ycontac t wit hMr . Brow nprio r t o 5 today' s conference , sa yi nth e las t tw o weeks ? 6 MR . CAMACHO : No , Judge . I hav e no t ha dan y 7 contac t wit hhi msinc e back , I think , I' mgoin g o nm y 8 bes t recollection , probabl yDecembe r 2011 , somethin g 9 lik e that , othe r tha ntha t on e an donl ytim e whe nh e 1 0 appeare do nth e teleconferenc e tha t al l o f u s wer e on . 1 1 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . The nlet' s tal k 1 2 abou t th e motio nfo r defaul t judgmen t whic hthi s Cour t 1 3 receive do nMarc h1 , 201 2 b yfax . An dI wante dt o 1 4 cha t wit hyo u a littl e bi t abou t it.becaus e ther e ar e 1 5 som e concern s I have•abou t th e motion , an dI though t 1 6 w e coul djus t clea r tha t u p b ya shor t conferenc e an d 1 7 obviousl yaddres s othe r matter s i f Mr . Brow nha d 1 8 joine du s today . I nth e motio nfo r summar yjudgmen t - 1 9 - 2 0 MR . CAMACHO : It' s no t a summar yjudgment . 2 1 It' s a defaul t judgment . Judge . 2 2 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Than k you . I nth e motio n 2 3 fo r defaul t judgment , yo u hav e lai dou t a statemen t o f 24 th e cas e wit hsom e lega l authority . Yo u hav e argue d 2 5 tha t th e issu e i s rip e fo r a defaul t judgment . Bu t Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 84

1 the nyo u plea ddifferen t relief . 2 MR . CAMACHO : I' msorry . Plea dtha t fro m 3 what ? 4 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Ple d differen t relief . S o 5 i f yo u g o t o pag e 4 o f you r motio nfo r defaul t 6 judgment . 7 MR . CAMACHO : Le t m e g o there . Le t m e pul l 8 i t up . 9 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . 1 0 MR . CAMACHO : Yes , pag e 4 . 1 1 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Th e las t paragrap hstart s 1 2 wit hth e wor d"wherefore " al l i ncaps . 1 3 MR . CAMACHO : Yes . 14 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Woul dyo u rea dtha t 1 5 silentl yt o yoursel f fo r a moment ? 1 6 MR . CAMACHO : Judge , tha t i s a nerror . 1 7 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Yes . 1 8 MR . CAMACHO : M yapologies . Tha t i s a n 1 9 error . Tha t i s actually , tha t actually , doggon e it . 2 0 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Yes . 2 1 MR . CAMACHO : I' mgoin g t o jus t stat e i t fo r 2 2 wha t i t is . Whe nm yparalega l assiste dm e i nputtin g 2 3 thi s praye r o f relie f together , sh e copie dth e praye r 24 o f relie f tha t wa s pu t i nth e motio nt o hav e th e 2 5 allegation s deeme dadmitted , an dthi s i s no t wha t I Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 85

1 wrote . An dthat' s m yresponsibility . 2 S o I have , th e onu s i s o nme . I shoul dhav e 3 bee nmor e carefu l i nreviewin g it , bu t I've bee nwit h 4 he r fo r 2 2 year s an dI kno wtha t that' s a poo r excuse . 5 Bu t tha t i s no t th e praye r o f relief . Tha t i s 6 improper . Tha t i s no t wha t I intende dt o write . 7 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Right . Because , a s yo u 8 know , I alreadygrante dth e motio nt o - - 9 MR . CAMACHO : Right . Right . Tha t i s 1 0 correct . It' s inconsisten t wit hth e bodythat' s abov e 1 1 it , an di t i s no t wha t I intende dt o hav e i nthere . 1 2 An dit' s no t wha t I wrot e originally . 1 3 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . Well , that' s 1 4 helpful . An dthe nI' mgoin g t o as k yo u als o to , I' m 1 5 goin g t o as k yo u t o correc t that , numbe r one . An d 1 6 the nI' m

goin g t o as k yo u t o d o somethin g els e i n 1 7 additio nt o that . 1 8 MR . CAMACHO : I' manticipatin g wha t you'r e 1 9 goin g t o as k me , an dI've sor t o f prepare dmyself . 2 0 Bu t I'l l wai t unti l I hea r it , Judge . 2 1 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . Yo u probabl ykno w 2 2 thi s already , bu t whe nthere' s a motio nfo r defaul t 2 3 judgment , I hav e t o establis htha t ther e i s sufficien t 2 4 fact s t o suppor t a mone yjudgment . 2 5 MR . CAMACHO : Tha t ma ywel l be , Judge . Bu t Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 86

1 g o ahead . 2 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Yes . An dI ca ngiv e yo u 3 authorit yfo r tha t i f yo u nee dto . 4 MR . CAMACHO : No , I don't . 5 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Sometime s w e ca nestablis h 5 tha t b yjus t lookin g a t th e pleadings . 7 MR . CAMACHO : An dI' mgoin g t o sugges t t o 8 yo u tha t i nthi s cas e yo u can , bu t g o ahead . 9 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Than k you . An dsometime s 1 0 whe nI loo k a t th e pleadings , I don' t hav e sufficien t 1 1 fact . I nthi s particula r case , an dI shoul dsay , i na 1 2 defaul t judgment , defaul t judgment s I loo k a t th e 1 3 evidenc e i na ligh t mos t favorabl e t o th e movin g part y 1 4 a s oppose dt o a summar yjudgmen t wher e I' mrequire dt o 1 5 loo k a t th e evidenc e i na ligh t mos t favorabl e t o th e 1 6 non-movin g party . 1 7 S o obviousl yi ndefaul t judgments , I alway s 1 8 giv e th e no do f th e ha t t o th e movin g party . A s I 1 9 read , an dI wan t t o cha t wit hyo u abou t this , I ten d 2 0 t o us e th e rule s an dresource s explainin g th e rule s 2 1 prett yfrequentl yi nm yjudicia l practice . 2 2 An don e o f myfavorit e resource s thi s yea r 2 3 i s th e Federa l Civi l Rule s Handbook , whic hwa s 24 publishe di n201 1 b ya grou p o f writers . Th e firs t 2 5 on e bein g Baicker-McKe e ( B a s i nboy , Aa s i napple , I Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 87

1 a s i nigloo , C a s i ncat , K a s i nkitten , E a s i negg , 2 Ra s i nRobert ) hyphe n( Ma s i nMary , C a s i ncat , K 3 a s i nkitten , E a s i negg , E a s i nEdgar) . 4 I nthei r discussio no f Rul e 55 , an di nmy 5 ow nexperience s ove r th e year s a s sittin g a s a judge , 6 defaul t judgment s fo r factua l finding s typicall yare ' 7 preferre dt o hav e som e wa yo f showin g ho wyo u go t th e 8 mone yjudgmen t tha t yo u ar e askin g for . 9 S o it' s suppose dt o stan dth e tes t o f 1 0 appellat e review . It' s suppose dt o be , o nit s face , 1 1 eas yfo r someon e t o tak e a loo k at , no dthei r hea dan d 1 2 say , oh , tha t make s sens e t o me . I ca nse e wher e yo u 1 3 go t tha t money . 1 4 A naffidavi t works . Anothe r documen t woul d 1 5 work . Bu t simpl ysayin g tha t $11,00 0 i s wha t yo u wan t 1 6 an dshoul dhave , i nmyopinion , isn' t a sufficien t 1 7 factua l basi s t o suppor t a defaul t judgment . 1 8 MR . CAMACHO : Okay . An dI woul dagre e wit h 1 9 you . Judge . An dI woul dagre e wit hyo u wholeheartedl y 2 0 i f i t were , becaus e i t woul dsee mt o be , a s yo u 2 1 stated , i t woul dappea r t o b e somewha t arbitrar yan d 2 2 capriciou s whic hth e la wdoe s no t favo r an dobviousl y 2 3 i f yo u can' t b e there , yo u can' t mak e a decisio nbase d 2 4 o na nabsenc e o f anything . An dtha t make s sense . 2 5 Howeve r - - Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n (202 ) 628-488 81 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay.MR . CAMACHO : You'l l

2 not e tha t th e complain t - - 3 JUDG E SULLIVAN : An dI' mlookin g a t it . 4 MR . CAMACHO : - - typicall ycite s th e 5 statutor yauthorit yfo r tha t civi l penalt ywhic h 6 authorize s that . Ou r sanctio nguidanc e table s whic h 7 w e use , we' db e anxiou s t o us e it , authorize s tha t a leve l o f civi l penalty . 9 Th e egregiousnes s o f th e fact s alleged , 1 0 whic halreadyhav e bee ndeeme dadmitted , authoriz e it . 1 1 Moreover , th e approach , an dI' mgoin g t o sugges t thi s 1 2 t o yo u i nterm s o f jus t digressin g eve r s o slightly . 1 3 Th e approac htha t i nmyexperienc e th e DO T 1 4 offic e wit hregar dt o civi l case s ha s taken ^ doe s no t 1 5 see m

t o necessaril ylenditsel f t o relyin g strictl yo n 1 6 Rul e 55 . I cite dtha t a s on e o f th e authorities , on e 1 7 o f th e way s which , i f yo u neede dto , yo u coul dsayd o 1 8 I hav e th e authorit yt o ente r a defaul t judgment ? 1 9 Yes , o f cours e yo u do . Le t m e giv e yo u 2 0 cite s fo r tw o differen t cases , an don e o f the mi s a 2 1 decisio ntha t wa s rendere db yJudg e Goodwi ni na cas e 2 2 very , ver ysimila r t o thi s on e wher e ther e wa s n o 2 3 answe r t o th e complaint , an dther e wa s repeate d 2 4 effort s t o tryt o ge t a nanswer , an dh e entere da 2 5 defaul t judgmen t fo r $340,00 0 upo nmotion . Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 89

1 An do nreview , th e decisio nmake r wh o a t th e 2 time , thi s i s a 200 9 case , 200 8 case , th e decisio n 3 make r wh o wa s the nacting , Rober t Sturgell , S-T-U-R-G

4 E-L-L , no wn o longe r wit hth e agency , retired . 5 Th e decisio nmake r note s tha t whil e th e 6 Responden t companypoint s ou t tha t th e la wdoe s no t 7 favo r defaul t judgment , h e goe s o nt o write , whil e 8 tha t i s true , th e Rule s o f Practic e i n1 4 C.F.R . Par t 9 1 3 (g ) stil l requir e a showin g o f goo dcaus e t o excus e 1 0 a defaul t becaus e thi s defaul t judgmen t wa s entered . 1 1 An dh e goe s o nt o saytha t a s a conclusion , 1 2 tha t becaus e th e Responden t faile dt o sho wgoo dcaus e 1 3 fo r it s failur e t o fil e timel yanswe r t o th e 1 4 complaint , h e decide dt o affir mth e administrativ e la w 1 5 judge' s orde r includin g th e $340,00 0 civi l penalty . 1 6 Tha t wa s not , ther e wa s n o demonstrativ e 1 7 showin g o nth e par t o f th e agenc ytha t ha dt o d o a 1 8 lin e ite mbreakdow na s t o ho wthe ygo t t o th e 340,000 . 1 9 Anothe r decisio nentere dbyon e o f you r 2 0 colleagues . Judg e Isaa c Banki na s recentl ya s Octobe r 2 1 16 , 2009 , i nth e matte r o f Jaso nArly , Respondent . 2 2 Similarly , h e faile dt o answe r a complain t wh o wa s 2 3 charge dwit hsmokin g i nth e lavator yo f a naircraft , a 2 4 Northwes t fligh t tha t wa s goin g fro mMichiga nt o 2 5 Anchorage , Ohio . Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 0

1 An dh e didn' t answe r th e complaint . H e 2 didn' t answe r th e motio nfo r default , an dth e Judge , 3 Judg e Banki nwrites , "I nthes e circumstances , I hav e 4 n o alternativ e excep t t o findanddetermin e th e 5 Responden t ha s a legitimat e complain t an dallegation s 6 whic halleg e tha t h e di dthes e variou s violations , an d 7 i s liabl e fo r a civi l penalt yo naccoun t o f suc h 8 violations . 9 "Th e complain t allege s tha t th e civi l 1 0 penalt yo f $2,20 0 i s appropriate . Respondent' s 1 1 failur e t o fil e a nanswe r seem s t o hav e bee nadmitted , 1 2 i s deeme dt o hav e admitte dthi s latte r allegatio n 1 3 also . Tha t require s m e t o hol dtha t th e Responden t 1 4 ha da civi l penalt yi nth e amoun t o f $2,200. " 1 5 An dh e s o ordere dit . Tha t wa s no t 1 6 appealed . An dI understand , o f course , i nterm s o f 1 7 controlling , I' m jus t givin g yo u somethin g that' s 1 8 righ t o npoin t fo r m e i nmyposition . Now , an dth e 1 9 reaso ntha t I' m bringin g thi s up i s becaus e I d o no t 2 0 believ e tha t th e agenc yha s a nadditiona l burden . 2 1 Now , Judge , that' s mypositio nwit hregar d 2 2 a s th e representativ e fo r th e agency , an dforgiv e m e 2 3 i f i t sound s a s i f I' mbein g flippan t whe nI tel l yo u 2 4 this , bu t I've bee nprosecutin g thes e case s fo r goin g 2 5 o n2 3 years . Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 1

1 I've neve r ha da judg e pu t m e t o th e tas k o f 2 havin g t o justif yth e dolla r amoun t wher e w e hav e 3 thes e set s o f fact s versu s havin g a tria l wher e 4 everythin g i s bein g litigated . 5 And , o f course , I hav e a continuin g ongoin g 6 burde nrelativ e t o th e civi l penalt ybecaus e i t i s 7 bein g contested . W e hav e n o contes t here , an dw e hav e 8 a tota l failur e o nth e par t o f thi s Responden t eve nt o 9 asser t wha t hi s positio nis . 1 0 H e ha s actuall yno t onl ybee nabl e t o d o 1 1 that , bu t th e fact s hav e bee ndeeme dadmitted . Hi s . 1 2 tota l lac k o f involvemen t demonstrate s t o m e a 1 3 willingnes s t o a t leas t o nth e fac e o f it , arguabl y, 1 4 withdra whi s appeal , abando nhi s appeal , an dbasicall y 1 5 si t an dwai t t o tak e hi s lick s whicheve r wa ythe y 1 6 come . 1 7 Ou r assessmen t o f this , ou r proposa l t o 1 8 asses s th e civi l penalt yi s base do nth e guidanc e tha t 1 9 w e us e internally , bu t mor e importantly , I cite dth e 2 0 statutor yauthoritie s fo r that . Tha t an dth e 2 1 egregiousnes s o f th e fact s allege dno war e no t i n 2 2 contest , certainl yjustif y$11,000 . 2 3 I nfact , historically , o ncase s simila r t o 2 4 this , I've gon e a s hig ha s 17,00 0 t o 25,00 0 wher e 2 5 there' s bee nactua l movemen t towar da nassaul t versu s Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 2

1 a somewha t remove dquasi-assaul t typ e thin g wher e 2 peopl e thro wthing s withi na containe daircraft , I 3 mea na capsul e flyin g a t 35,00 0 feet . 4 A t anyrate , that' s m yposition . An di f yo u 5 believ e tha t tha t i s insufficien t t o carr yth e day , 6 then , yo u know , I '1 1 hav e t o d o whateve r I hav e t o d o 7 beyon dcorrectin g th e praye r o f relie f that' s i nth e 8 motion . 9 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Than k yo u ver ymuch , Mr . 1 0 Camacho , an dI appreciat e th e reference s tha t yo u hav e 1 1 give nme . An dI understan dtha t ther e ha s bee nsom e 1 2 practic e her e bysom e judge s t o simpl yaccep t th e 1 3 notic e o f complain t o nit s face . 1 4 I woul dnote , however , tha t I hav e bee n 1 5 sittin g a s a judg e fo r almos t 3 0 years . I hav e t o 1 6 thin k abou t th e amoun t o f time . Mayb e close r t o 2 5 1 7 years , excus e me . I starte di n1989 . An di t ha s bee n 1 8 myexperienc e i nal l thos e year s an dobviousl ywe'v e 1 9 bee npracticin g i ndifferen t area s - - 2 0 MR . CAMACHO : Y e s . 2 1 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Tha t whe nyo u hav e a sum , 2 2 ther e ha s t o b e som e actua l assertio nbeyon dwha t I 2 3 hav e befor e m e tha t th e su mi s reasonabl e an dtha t 2 4 ther e i s a proo f tha t th e su mi s justified . 2 5 S o whethe r tha t coul db e a s simpl e a s a n Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 3

1 affidavi t fromyo u sayin g tha t you'v e reviewe dth e 2 sum , tha t i t meet s al l th e criteri a o f th e element s 3 you'r e suppose dt o prov e ha dthi s cas e gon e t o tria l 4 o r whethe r i t i s a cop yo f th e shee t tha t yo u hav e 5 internall ytha t cause dyo u t o com e up wit hthi s 6 figure . 7 MR . CAMACHO : Understood , Judge . I 8 understand , an dI ca nprovid e that . 9 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Good . 1 0 MR . CAMACHO : I wante dt o jus t stat e my 1 1 position , an dI understan dtha t yo u woul dprefe r t o 1 2 hav e tha t kin do f evidenc e o r tha t kin do f 1 3 documentatio nbefor e yo u rende r a decisio no nth e 1 4 motion . 1 5 An dI wil l certainly•compl ywit hyou r wishe s 1 6 becaus e there' s n o reaso nno t to . I ca nd o it , bu t I 1 7 di dfee l compelle dt o brin g t o you r attentio nth e 1 8 experienc e tha t I hav e limite di nthi s particula r typ e 1 9 o f cas e base do ncase s rendere dbyyou r colleagues . 2 0 But , yo u know , you'r e th e Judge , an dI've 2 1 go t a motio ni nfron t o f you . An di f you'r e no t goin g 2 2 t o rul e o ni t unti l yo u ge t thi s kin do f stuff , thes e 2 3 documentation s tha t you'v e requested , I ca nprovid e i t 2 4 an dI will . 2 5 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Than k you . Wha t I woul d Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 4

1 lik e t o hav e yo u d o i f yo u woul db e s o kin di s t o 2 simpl yfil e a namende dmotio nfo r defaul t judgmen t 3 tha t amend s you r praye r fo r relie f essentiall ys o tha t 4 I ca nac t o nit . 5 MR . CAMACHO : Okay . 6 JUDG E SULLIVAN : An dtha t als o add s whateve r 7 yo u fee l woul db e a factua l proo f basi s tha t 8 supplement s you r notic e o f complain t s o tha t I "ca n 9 sig na norde r sayin g I hav e bee nprovide da factua l 1 0 basi s tha t wil l stan dth e tes t o f appeal . 1 1 MR . CAMACHO : I ca nd o that . 1 2 JUDG E SULLIVAN : An di t ca nb e somethin g 1 3 ver ysimpl e tha t coul db e generate di nyou r offic e 1 4 withou t to o muc had o I think . 1 5 MR . CAMACHO : Right . Right . I ca nd o that , 1 6 Judge . 1 7 JUDG E SULLIVAN : An di nth e meantime , I 1 8 woul db e happ yt o rea dth e case s yo u hav e cite dan d 1 9 the nloo k fo r som e mor e o f m yown . 2 0 MR . CAMACHO : Good . Good . Le t giv e yo u 2 1 that , le t m e giv e you , i f I may , forgiv e m e fo r 2 2 oversteppin g you , bu t I thin k I faile dt o giv e yo u th e 2 3 citatio no nth e firs t cas e whic his , i f you'r e ready . 2 4 It' s cite dI nth e Matte r o f Globa l Peac e 2 5 Initiative , Inc . That' s th e on e wher e Judg e Goodwi n Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 5

1 rendere da decision . Globa l Peac e Initiative , Inc . 2 Th e FA Aorde r is , actuall ywhic hnumbe r i s th e on e 3 that' s easies t t o find ? Th e FDM S No . o r Docke t No. ? 4 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Eithe r one . 5 MR . CAMACHO : Th e Docke t No . i s CP07EA0013 , 6 CP , Charli e Papp a 07EA0013 , an di t wa s serve do n 7 Augus t 21 , 2008 . An dtha t come s fro mth e decisio n 8 make r base do na prio r defaul t judgmen t entere db y 9 Judg e Goodwi no nOctobe r 24 , 200 7 fo r $340,000 . 1 0 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . 1 1 MR . CAMACHO : Th e othe r decisio nrendere db y 1 2 Judg e Banki nwhic hdi dno t g o u p o nappea l i s I nth e 1 3 Matte r o f Jaso nh

. Sarli , S-A-R-L-I . FA ADocke t No . 1 4 CP , Charli e Papp a 09AL , I gathe r that' s fo r Atlantic , 1 5 0006 . Aiidtha t wa s serve dOctobe r 16 , 2009 . 1 6 Again , thi s wa s th e Judge' s orde r grantin g 1 7 motio nfo r defaul t judgment . Tha t amoun t wa s onl y 1 8 $22,000 . S o thos e ar e th e tw o tha t I foun dan dI 1 9 didn' t g o an yfurther . I figur e the ywer e prett ymuc h 2 0 o npoin t relativ e t o th e facts . 2 1 An dth e outcom e seeme dt o suppor t ou r 2 2 positio nbase do nexperience . But , yo u know . Judge , 2 3 again , you'r e th e Judge . And , yo u know , whe nth e 24 Cour t want s somethin g i norde r t o tr yt o ge t t o th e 2 5 nex t leve l o f wher e w e hav e t o mov e forwar don , I' m Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 6

1 happ yt o d o wha t ha s t o b e done . 2 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . I appreciat e that , 3 an dI woul djus t note.fo r yo u tha t I d o appreciat e 4 you r expertis e i nthi s matter . I simply , i nm y 5 experience s sinc e sittin g o nth e benc hbeginnin g m y 6 servic e o nth e benc hi n1989 , m yexperience s hav e bee n 7 different . 8 MR . CAMACHO : I understand . 9 MR . CAMACHO : An ds o I'l l as k yo u t o tak e 1 0 car e o f tha t matter . Ho wlon g d o yo u thin k you'l l 1 1 nee dt o file ? 1 2 MR . CAMACHO : Judge , I'l l ge t i t t o yo u 1 3 . withi non e wee k fro mtoday . You'1 1 hav e i t eve n 1 4 befor e then . 1 5 • JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . Great . The nI wil l 1 6 loo k forwar dt o it , an dthan k yo u ver ymuc hfo r thi s 1 7 educationa l conference . I s ther e anythin g els e tha t I 1 8 nee dt o addres s fo r yo u an dyou r client ? 1 9 MR . CAMACHO : No , Judge , bu t ther e i s 2 0 somethin g I' mcuriou s about . An dI gues s it' s kin do f 2 1 a matte r o f interestin g protocol . An dfo r me , i t wil l 2 2 hel p m e understan dbetter . A t on e point , I ha da 2 3 discussio nwit hyo u a s a nalternativ e t o motions . 2 4 No . Yo u actuall yaske dm e a question , an d 2 5 whe nI file dth e motio nt o hav e th e motio ntha t wa s Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 7

1 file dt o hav e th e allegation s admitte dhad , a s par t o f 2 it s praye r o f relief , a reques t tha t th e matte r b e 3 somewha t bifurcate ds o tha t w e ha da hearin g o nonl y 4 th e issu e o f sanction . 5 Why ? Becaus e that' s wha t historicall ya s 6 experience dwit hth e judge s wh o onc e addresse dth e 7 issu e o f sanctio nwhic hi s no wth e topi c o f thi s 8 teleconference . 9 A t tha t point , yo u indicate dt o m e tha t tha t 1 0 ma yno t b e necessar ybecaus e i t reall ywa s a n 1 1 unnecessar yexpenditur e o f time , effort , energy . An d 1 2 thes e ar e mywords , bu t I interprete di t tha t way . 1 3 An dI said , okay . Well , then , yo u know , i f 1 4 w e ca nd o i t b ymotion , tha t woul db e great . I t ha s 1 5 neve r bee nmyexperienc e wit hregar dt o sanction s t o 1 6 no t hav e a hearin g o nth e sanctio nportio no f i t 1 7 becaus e judge s alway s wan t t o have , the ywan t t o hea r 1 8 th e testimony . 1 9 Th e judge s hav e alway s wante dt o hav e a 2 0 hearin g fo r th e ver ypurpos e tha t you'r e seeking , 2 1 whic hi s t o hav e a recor do f whyi s i t tha t yo u thin k 2 2 th e sanctio ni s wha t i t i s o r ca nyo u justif yi t o r 2 3 somethin g lik e that . 2 4 However , on e woul dwan t t o fram e that . I 2 5 thin k we'r e o nth e sam e pag e excep t tha t instea do f Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 8

1 havin g th e hearing , I thin k wha t you'r e doin g i nlarg e 2 measur e i s seeking , i s puttin g documentation

- rathe r 3 tha nhavin g th e expenditur e o f time , effort , an d 4 energ yi na venu e someplac e an da hearin g an dtravel . 5 I jus t hav e no t ha dth e opportunit yt o loo k 6 a t i t o r experienc e i t th e wa ytha t you'r e addressin g 7 i t today . Bu t I believ e tha t th e en dresul t tha t wa s 8 previousl ysough t wit hth e "let s hav e a hearin g o nth e 9 sanctio nonly " seek s t o arriv e a t th e sam e place . 1 0 I hav e t o believ e tha t becaus e i t make s 1 1 sense . Th e practic e o f la wha s som e consistency , 1 2 inheren t consistenc yi nterm s o f bein g subjec t t o 1 3 revie wan dth e Judg e want s t o hav e th e decisio n 1 4 sustai ntha t review . 1 5 I mean , withstan dscrutinysuc htha t it' s 1 6 upheld . I mean , I kno wyo u kno wthat , bu t a t any 1 7 rate , I jus t wante dt o mak e sur e we'r e o nth e sam e 1 8 pag e becaus e i nth e futur e shoul dw e findourselve s 1 9 addressin g anothe r case , I woul dexpec t tha t you , i f 2 0 w e ge t int o a simila r situation , yo u woul dagai nno t 2 1 see k t o hav e a hearin g o nth e sanctio nissue , an dI 2 2 woul dno t reques t that . I woul dreques t tha t probabl y 2 3 wit hJudg e Goodwi nbecaus e h e has , hi s practic e i s 2 4 everythin g wes t o f th e Mississippi . 2 5 JUDG E SULLIVAN : I understan dthat . I n Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81 9

1 essence , I believ e yo u andI ar e o nth e sam e pag e i n 2 tha t fo r me , i f a cas e i f rip e fo r a defaul t judgment , 3 there' s n o reaso nt o bifurcat e th e motio nt o achiev e a 4 defaul t judgment . 5 I nessence , i f someone , saylik e i nthi s 6 case , ha s basicall ydroppe dou t o f sigh t an dha s 7 evince dthroug hbehavio r an dactio nabsolutel yn o 8 interes t i npursuin g anytyp e o f hearing . 9 Tha t seem s t o cr you t fo r th e expedien t us e 1 0 o f a motio nfo r defaul t judgmen t a s oppose dt o a 1 1 motio nt o dee mallegation s admitted , a motio nfo r a 1 2 hearin g o nsanctio nonl yor , i nth e alternative , a 1 3 secon dmotio nfor . defaul t judgmen t o nth e civi l 1 4 penalt yportion . 1 5 I thin k i t ca nal l b e don e i non e motion , 1 6 an dtha t ca neithe r b e a motio nfo r summar yjudgmen t 1 7 o r a motio nfo r default . Th e motio nfo r defaul t 1 8 obviousl yi s t o th e movin g party' s advantag e becaus e 1 9 th e Cour t i s require dt o loo k a t al l evidenc e an d 2 0 documentatio ni na ligh t mos t favorabl e t o th e 2 1 movemen t sinc e th e respondin g part yha s disappeared . 2 2 I ndefaul t judgments , typicall yeve ni f th e 2 3 totalit yo f th e document s tha t ar e referre dt o o r 2 4 attache dt o th e motio no f defaul t support , yo u know , 2 5 th e findin g o f violation , a s I understan ddefaul t Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 82 0

1 judgment s a s a generality , ther e stil l mus t be , withi n 2 tha t motion , som e statemen t tha t show s tha t th e su m 3 requeste dno t onl yha s bee nple dspecifically , an di n 4 thes e cases , yo u usuall yplea da specifi c amount . 5 Bu t als o tha t th e su mca nb e prove nb y 6 computatio ni nsom e way , shap e o r form , tha t it' s no t 7 jus t a namoun t tha t wa s pulle dou t o f th e air . Whe n 8 tha t happens , the nan yreviewin g bod ywh o i s 9 confronte db ya motio nt o - - 1 0 MR . CAMACHO : Se t th e defaul t judgmen t 1 1 aside . 1 2 JUDG E SULLIVAN : - - se t th e judgmen t aside , 1 3 ha s t o loo k a t no t onl ywhethe r there' s goo dcaus e fo r 1 4 th e absence , bu t whethe r there' s an ybasi s t o se t 1 5 asid e th e amoun t becaus e o f a ^ legitimat e defense . 1 6 S o i t make s th e defaul t judgmen t sor t o f 1 7 appellate-proof , i nm yopinion , an di t make s th e 1 8 confidenc e o f th e reviewin g bod yi nth e defaul t 1 9 judgmen t itsel f muc hmor e certain . 2 0 S o i t i s a protectiv e measur e I thin k tha t 2 1 wa s buil t int o th e rule s t o hel p peopl e wh o see k a 2 2 defaul t judgmen t no t hav e t o com e bac k a yea r o r tw o 2 3 late r an dlitigat e th e whol e thing . 24 MR . CAMACHO : Ver ywell . Understood . An dI 2 5 appreciat e tha t explanation . That' s ver ygood . I Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n'

(202 ) 628-488 82 1

1 thin k becaus e I've bee ni ngovernmen t fo r s o lon g an d 2 I steppe dou t o f bein g a JAGoffice r doin g seve nyear s 3 o f crimina l prosecutio nan ddefense , an dcam e into , I 4 di dno t practic e i nth e civi l secto r except , again , 5 onl ydoin g crimina l cases . 6 S o I don' t hav e historically , th e experienc e 7 o f actuall ygoin g t o court , seekin g judgment , mone y 8 judgements , tryin g t o get , yo u know , tryin g t o ge t 9 the m

enforced , e t cetera , suc htha t I hav e a goo d 1 0 gras p o f th e typ e o f suppor t tha t I woul dnee dfo r 1 1 that . 1 2 Myexperienc e the ni s limite di nth e las t 2 3 1 3 year s t o thi s agenc ya s fa r a s thi s practice , an d 1 4 historicall yit' s bee ndifferent . Experientially , i t 1 5 hasn' t been , simila r t o wha t you'r e suggestin g here , 1 6 i t ha s bee ndifferent . 1 7 So , yo u know , I thin k th e bette r practic e i s 1 8 th e wa yyou'r e doin g it , you'r e suggestin g today . An d 1 9 I' mgoin g t o wor k a t adoptin g tha t an dinterweavin g 2 0 tha t int o futur e case s wit hJudg e Goodwi nwh o i s 2 1 predominantl yth e judg e tha t I se e becaus e we'r e on , 2 2 wes t o f th e Mississippi . 2 3 Than k yo u fo r explainin g tha t t o me , an dI 2 4 appreciat e that . I thin k it' s a matte r o f goo d 2 5 practice . A s a lawyer , I ca nse e th e wisdo mi nthat . Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 82 2

1 An da s a judg e clearly , tha t woul dbod e eve nmor e s o 2 becaus e yo u don' t wan t t o hav e you r decision s 3 overturned . 4 JUDG E SULLIVAN : No t onl ythat , bu t i t put s 5 yo u i na , I think , a ver ypersuasiv e positio nwit h 6 you r respondent s a s well . Particularly , i f yo u ad d 7 tha t kin do f informatio nint o you r origina l notice . 8 MR . CAMACHO : Right . Becaus e the ni t doe s 9 shif t th e burde nan dthey'r e goin g t o hav e t o overcom e 1 0 tha t whic hsometime s ca nb e done . Peopl e wh o hav e 1 1 goo dlawyers , they'l l fin da nargumen t o r mak e a n 1 2 argumen t tha t a t leas t i s facially , yo u know , wort h• 1 3 listenin g to . Whethe r i t ha s meri t o r no t i nth e 1 4 botto mlin e i s anothe r question . 1 5 Judge , than k yo u ver ymuch . I don' t hav e 1 6 an yothe r issue s t o addres s o r an yothe r questions . I 1 7 understan dfully . Withi na week , you'l l hav e th e 1 8 amende dmotio nan dyou'l l hav e supportin g 1 9 documentatio nwit hregar dt o th e sanction . 2 0 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Okay . Than k yo u s o much , 2 1 Mr . Camacho . I t look s lik e ou r busines s i s complete . 2 2 I'l l wis hyo u a ver ygoo dday , an dw e ca ng o of f th e 2 3 record . 24 MR . CAMACHO : Than k you , Judge . 2 5 JUDG E SULLIVAN : Than k you . Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 81

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 . 1 4 . 1 5 • 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 MR . CAMACHO : Hav e a goo dafternoon . (Whereupon , a t 1:3 0 p.m. , th e telephon e conferenc e i n th e above-entitle dmatte r wa s concluded. ) / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / . / / / / 2 3

Heritag e Reportin g Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 8

# 2 ^ REPORTER' S CERTIFICAT E



### DOCKE T NO. : f^A

- iOH-/ ^ CAS E TITLE : Qo-^y^^f ^' • • [cWWT v HEARINGDATE : ^(Vc A3- 3 f <20l^X LOCATION : \J[)(^:$^\^^t,\ ^Q . (^. ,

I hereb ycertif ytha t the proceeding s an d evidenc e ar e containe dfull yan daccuratel yo nthe tape s an

dnote s reporte db

yme a t the hearing i nth e abov e cas e befor e {j{

. S D-tPoA^Mj^^ ^o4-77i&>l_J3/bW?cf^

Date:J/o?j//J l

Officia l Reporte r Heritag e Reporting Corporatio n Suit e 60 0 122 0 L Street , N.W . Washington , D.C . 20005-401 8

Heritag e Reporting Corporatio n

(202 ) 628-488 8