CORRECTED AT PAGE 3 D 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS H._ __ n,-,!NG 

WASHINGTON, DC 

***************************** 

In the Matter of: * 

KENNETH RAY RUMBERGER * Docket No. FAA-2015-0639 

* Case No. 2015WP270015 

* ALJ -RAWALD 

* 

***************************** 

TO: Honorable Douglas M. Rawald and Respondent 

COMPLAINANT'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS 

COMES NOW, Complainant, by counsel, pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.218(d), files this 

Opposition to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, served by mail on August 15,2016. 

Introduction 

The Complaint alleges Respondent violated 14 C.F.R. § 91.11 when, on or about 

November 15, 2014, he pointed a laser at an aircraft- N341HP, and the beam oflight illmninated 

the aircraft's cockpit, interfering with a crewrnember in the performance of the crewrnember' s 

duties. See, 76 FR 76611-76612 (Dec. 8, 2011): directing laser beams towards aircraft operating 

on the ground or in the air so that it interferes with a crewrnember in the performance of the 

crewmember's duties is a violation of section 91.11; and persons violating section 91.11 are 

subject to a substantial civil penalty. 

Background 

Respondent moves for dismissal stating that the Complainant's evidence does not meet 

the clear and convincing standard of proof. Respondent attaches to his motion the releasable 

portions of Enforcement Investigative Report (EIR) 2015WP270015 and a declaration from the 

passenger who was in Respondent's vehicle at the time of Respondent's arrest. 
The releasable portions of the EIR include the Laser Beam Exposure Questionnaire 

completed by the aircraft's pilot in command- CHP Of1icer Gavitte and a summary "Record 

Review" of the Richmond Police Department Arrest Report. (Richmond Police Department 

requested that its arrest report not be disseminated.') In support of his motion, Respondent states 

that the Laser Beam Exposure Questionnaire contains contradictory responses; that portions of 

the EIR released to him are blacked out; and that the "Record Review" of the Richmond Police 

Department arrest report is biased. In further support of his motion, Respondent includes and 

refers to his passenger's declaration wherein the passenger states he only observed Respondent 

aiming the laser pointer at street signs. 

Argument 

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 13.223 of the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty 

Actions, the standard of proof in this matter is by the preponderance of reliable, probative, and 

substantial evidence. 

The portions of the EIR that were blacked out were withheld as containing privilegeddeliberative, pre-decisional material. See, the undersigned counsel's cover letter to Respondent 

' providing the releasable portions of the EIR, which is attached to Respondent's motion to 

dismiss. 

CHP OtTice Gavitte explains that the reason he responded "No" on the Laser Beam 

Exposure Questionnaire to the questions "Did the laser illumination incident interfere with your 

performance of pilot or crewmember duties during the flight?" and "Did the laser illumination 

I On August 22, 2016, the undersigned counsel contacted Respondent and provided Respondent with the records 

section supervisor contact information of the Richmond Police Department so that he could obtain the report of his 

arrest directly with the Richmond Police Department. 
incident disrupt your mission?" is because through mitigation he was able to maintain control 

and continue operating the helicopter. See attached, Exhibit C-1, Officer Gavitte' s 

Narrative/Supplemental, dated August 25, 2016, with attached Exhibit 1, Flight Officer W. 

Lowe's Narrative/Supplemental, dated November 15, 2014, and with attached Exhibit 2, the 

Laser Beam Exposure Questionnaire completed by Officer Gavitte. Officer Gavitte states that he 

was able to mitigate the laser strike to his eyes by taking his hand off a flight control (collective) 

to block the laser beam, by using his peripheral vision only for navigating on a forward path, and 

by lowering his vision inside the cockpit so that he would not lose control. Thus, there is no 

dispute that the laser beam illuminated the cockpit of the helicopter and the laser beam interfered 

with Officer Gavitte's performance of his piloting duties; Officer Gavitte took extraordinary 

measures to maintain control of his helicopter. On the remaining issue, Respondent denies he 

pointed a laser at the police helicopter. However, Officer Gavitte states that the laser beam 

appeared to deliberately track the aircraft. See Exhibit C-1, at p. 5 of Exhibit 2. 

WHEREFORE, the Complainant respectfully requests ti;lis Court deny Respondent's 

motion to dismiss. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Patricia A. McNall 

Acting Assistant Chief Counsel 

For Enforcem~nt 

By: · ~b 

Lisa Toscano, ttomey 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

email: Lisa.M.Toscano!fffaa.gov 

Telephone: (310) 725-7100 (main) 

(31 0) 725-7110 (direct) 

(310) 725-6816 (fax) 

Dated: ~ :U,; 2-0;t::, 

3 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

NARRA TfVEISUPPLEMENTAL 

CHP 556 (Rev. 7-90) OPI 065 

DATE OF INCIDENT/OCCURRENCE . l TIME (2400) 

11115/2014 . 0007 i"X"ONE "X" ONE 

'0 Narrative 0 Collision Report 

j NCIC NUMBER 

9314 

I OFFICER t.D. NUMBER 

015945 TYPE SUPPLEMENTAL ("X" APPUCABlE} 

0 BA Update D Fatal 

bgj Supplemental l8l Other: FAA 0 Hazardous Materta\s 0 School Bus 

CfTYICOUNTYIJUDIClAL DISTRICT 

Richmond/Contra Costal 

LOCATJON!SUBJECT 

Over Hilltop Dr. at 1-80/Kenneth Rumberger 

1. SUMMARY (FACTS} 

Page of 2 

NUMBER 

0 Hit and Run Update 

l8l Other. FAA laser fonn 

REPORTING DISTRICT/BEAT I CITATION NUMBER 

STATE HIGHWAY RELATED 

DYes l8l No 

2. This SUt>Qlemental re[!ort is being 12re12ared to clarif;r m~ [!osition, involvement in and resQonses in the laser beam 

3. guestionnaire regarding a laser vs. aircraft incident on November 15, 2014. 

4. On that date I was on du!Y, in uniform and em(2lo:yed as a Qeace officer with the California Highway Patrol. I was 

15 and am assigned as an officer/helico12ter t>ilot with the CHP's Golden Gate Division Air OQerations Unit based at 

6. Napa Airport. 

'· On 11115/141 was flying as the Qilot-in-command (single t>ilot) of a marked CHP/Iaw enforcement helicoQter, a 

a. Euroco12ter AS-350 83 registration N341 HP, "H-32". The crew consisted ofmyselfand m;r t>artner, Officer W. 

9. Lowe, # 19436, a non-Qilot Flight Officer/Paramedic who is also a 12eace officer. I was using Night Vision Goggles 

10. (NVG's) during the flight. 

11. At aQt>rDXimately 0007 hours we were on patrol over the Citv of Richmond near Hilltop Dr. and l-80 freeway. At 

12. an altitude of al:'Qroximately 1200' MSL, we were struck by a green laser light. The beam entered the cockQit 

13. windshield from a ground QOSition from the left/front of the aircraft. Though my NVO's were in the down QOSition 

14. the beam entered from the left side hitting m)' naked eye. The beam a1212eared to track the helicot>ter as we were in 

15. a left hand turn and the beam struck the aircraft a second time from the front. The beam shined brightly and caused 

16. me temJ:lora!:Y flash blindness. When it shined through the Qlexiglass it "scattered" and was disorienting/distracting 

17. besides causing tem12orarv blindness. When the beam subseguently hit the aircraft from the front, I lifted my left 

18. hand from the collective control to block/minimize the beam and had to use my periQheral vision only to see ahead. 

19. Ut>on return to Nat>a I ex2erienced Qain/irritation/redness to Qrimarily m;r left e:ye. 

20. 

21. 

22. 

23. 

24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

129 

30. 

31. 

PREPARER"S NP.ME ant:! l.D NUMBEf~ DATE REVIEWER'S NAME DATE 

P. Gavitte#\5945 08/25116 

Use prevtous edtttons un~d depleted 

Exhibit C-1 

1 

Chp55S_11 14.pdi 

I 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

NARRA TIVEISUPPLEMENT AL 

CHP 556 (Rev 7-90) OPI 065 

DATE OF !NCrDENTIOCCURRENCE 

1"""1':07 11115/2014 

"X" ONE "X" ONE 

I NCIC NUMBER 

9314 

l OFFICER I.D, NUMBER 

015945 

TYPE SUPPLEMENTAL ('A APPUCABLE} 

0 Narrative D Comsion Report D BAUpdate D Fatal 

~ Supplemental I;;;J Othec FAA D Hazardous Materials D School Bus 

C!TY/COUNTYtJUOIClAL DISTRICT 

Richmond/Contra Costa/ 

Page 2 of 2 

NUMBER 

D Hit and Run Update 

I;;;J Other. FAA laser form 

REPORTING DISTRICT/BEAT JCITAT\ON NUMBER 

'LOCATION/SUBJECT STATE H\GHWAY RELATED 

I 

Over Hilltop Dr. at 1-80/Kenneth Rumberger 0 Yes 0No 

1. QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES 

2. I answered "no" in the guestionnaire to the questions, "Did the laser illumination incident interfere with xour 

3. I:Jerfonmance of Qilot or crewmember duties during the flight?" and "Did the laser illumination incident disrupt xour 

4. mission?". Due to the number of incidents and safetx concerns related to laser illumination I have conducted 

5. train.ing to mitigate disorientation. Part of this training is to "aviate" first, keep the aircraft fl;ting to [>rotect m;t 

6. crew, mj'self and eersons/[>ro[>erty on the ground. In this case "aviating" included the mitigating res[>onse of taking 

7. m:r hand off a control {collective) to block the laser beam. It also included having to view the forward r:>ath of the 

8. aircraft with [>eripheral vision only as well as lowering my vision to inside the cockpit to make sure I 

9. didn't lose controL Regarding the second guestion of "Did the laser illumination incident disru[>t your mission?". 

10. l answered "no" as I took the guestion to mean, did we divert from an active call (pursuit, search etc.) to handle the 

11. laser incident. While we were not on another active call, we were on an active r>atrol flight which includes securi!;t 

12. checks of infrastructure such as bridges, refineries, [>OWer stations etc. and we did divert from this securi!J' [>atrol to 

13. recover from the laser illumination and follow the sus[>ect and have ground officers affect an arrest. 

14. 

15. 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 

20. 

21. 

22. 

23. 

24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

28. 

29. - 30. 

31. 

PREPARER'S NAME and LD. NUMBER 

P. Gavitte #15945 

DATE REV\ EWER'S NAME 

08/25/!6 

Use prev1ous ed1t1ons unt1l depleted 

DATE 

Exhibit C-1 

2 

' 

i 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

NARRATIVE/SUPPlEMENTAL 

DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 

1111512014 0020 

1 SUMMARY: 

PAGES I OF S 1 

NCICNUMBER OFFICER I. D. NUMBER 

1478 14-17058 

2 On Saturday, November 15, 2014 at approximately 0007 hours, 1 was on patrol as a Flight Officer in 

3 CHP Helicopter H-32 with my partner Officer/Pilot Gavilte, ID #15945, flying along 1-60 eastbound in e 

4 shallow /aft tum at approximately 1200 feel over the city of Richmond. 

5 As we were flying, I noticed a bright green fiash from my front left side. I immediately recognized this flash 

6 to be that of a green laser being pointed at our aircraft. I knew it to be a laser pointer as I have been 

7 Illuminated with a green laser before while in L'le aircraft. 1 told the pilot we were being lased, and we were 

8 immediateiy lased another time, now from a head on position to the aircraft, as the laser appeared to be 

9 tracking the helicopter. The area from where the laser was coming appeared to be the intersection of 

10 westbound Hilltop Drive and the on-ramp to 1-80 eastbound. 1 saw the laser was coming from the driver 

11 side window of a light colored sedan which was the only vehicle at the intersection, stopped at the red light. 

12 When the light turned green, the slv continued on Hil~op Drive at a high rate of speed until it caught up to 

13 several cars ancl had to slow down. The slv then stopped in the left tum Jane of Hilltop Drive, preparing to 

14 make a left turn onto Robert Miller Drive. I asked Richmond Police Department Dispatch for any available 

15 unit in the area to assist in conducting an enforcement stop on the vehicle. Three ground units responded 

16 to the Intersection of Hllftop Drive at Robert Miller Drive before the light turned green for the slv to tum left 

17 onto Robert Miller Drive. When the light turned green, the slv quickly lumed left and changed lanes, 

18 rapidly accelerating from traffic. The s/v then made a left turn onto Birmingham Drive, followed by a right 

19 turn onto Lancester Drive, followed by another left turn onto Southampton Court. The slv went to the end 

20 of the court and !hen slowly turned around and began coming back towards Lancaster Drive. By this lime, 

21 I was able to direct tha unffs to where the s/v was, and as the s/v made a left tum back onto Lancaster 

22 Drive, the Richmond Police Officers conducted an enforcement stop after I confirmed they were behind the 

23 right vehicle. From the time we were lased, until the !/me the enforcement stop was made, I never lost 

24 sight of the s/v. The primary unit, ca/lsign1 Lincoln 8, was Officer Shanks #1478. He identilied the driver 

25 as Kenneth Ray Rumberger and ultimately placed him under arrest for violation of 24 7.5 PC - Pointing a 

26 Laeer Pointer at an Aircraft. The green laser was located and later booked Into evidence at the Richmond 

27 Police Station. (Refer to Officer Shanks's arrest report for details involving his arrest and evidence booking) 

28 

29 RECOMMENDATIONS: 

30 I request this supplemental be adcled to Officer Shanks's report to assist in the prosecution of Kenneth Ray 

3 1 Rumberger for the crime of 247.5 PC - Pointing a laser Pointer at en aircraft. 

PREPARED BY 

W.LOWE I OFFICER 

t.D. NUilf.fleR 

019436 

DATE REVIEWER'S NAME 

11/15/2014 

DATE 

Exhibit 1 

1 
• 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

LASER BEAM EXPOSURE 

QUESTIONNAIRE 

Complete questionnaire and e-mail to: laserreports@faa.gov 

OR senti via fax to FAA Washington Operations Center Complex (WOCC). (202) 267-5289 ATTN: DEN 

CONTACT INFORMATION 

Name of pllotlcrewmember reporting 

Peter Gavitle 

E-mail address and phone number (e.g., home, cell, wori<) 

j pgavitte@chp.ca.gov (707) 257-0103 worn 

What seat In th<l cockpit were you occupying at the time of the laser beam exposure? 

(' Lefi (. Right (" Jumpseat ('Right Engineer ("Other/Not applicable 

How many crewmembers on the flight had laser light shined directly In their eyes? 

(' None (the laser light beam did not dlreclly enter anyone's eyes) 

(' One \o Two ("Three ("Four or more 

Note: If any other crewmember had direct exposure to the laser light In their eyes, each parson exposed should 

complete their own copy of this FAA Lasar &lam ~Exposure Questionnaire 

FLIGHT INFORMATION 

Flight number, call sign and aircraft registration number (e.g., SWA572, Southwest N287WN) 

I "H-32" N341 HP 

Aircraft Make and Model (e.g., 6oelng 737, Cessna 172, Airbus A320, BAE Jetstream 32, Domler 328) 

I AEC AS-350 helicopter 

Category of alrcmfl 

r Airplane (i Rotorcraft (' Ughter than air I Other (specify) 

Type of operation 

I Commercial Alllatlon (' General Alllation (' Mlntary (e' Law Enforcement 

~-----------------------------, (' Medical (' News Reporting I Dlhar (specify) 

L-----------------------------------~ 

Date of laser !ncldan! 

'

November 15, 

2014 Pleese enter date of laser Incident In Month Day, Year format (e.g, July 27, 201.2). OR mcu,. clid< In . the data field It display a drop down arrow to view calendar and make your selection. The calendar 

selection is optimized for PC's and may not be available on a Mac. 

Time of laser lnelclent (enter Universal Time Coordinated (UTC/Zulu) format rounded to the Merest fiVe minulse) 

\~} ~ I.ITC!Zulu 

. :•'· :, .. ,. - ·'. ~· 

Exhibit 2 

1 
I certify this lOP is a 

Certified true copy. 

David T. Jensen 

Dated 1/9/2015 

Exhibit 1 

2 
Time of clay during laser Incident 

Nighttime, on or after midnight local time 

Loea!!on of aircraft during laser Incident (Flxed Radial Distance (FRO) from navald or airport, OR add latllcng coordinates) 

Helicopter was just south of the Intersection of Hilltop Dr. end I-SO freeway in the City of Richmond, CA 

Estimated geographic location of the laser source (e.g., the laser source relative to KDFW approach end of runway 35L 

was approximately 220 degree radial and 2 miles. You can also provide estimated laVIong coondlnates) 

the laser source was from within a vehicle stopped at the ln!ersection of Hmtop Dr. and 1-80 

Ap;>rox!mate altitude of the aircraft above ground level (AGL) 

1501 - 1000 Feet AGL 

Primary lllre<:!lon of flight at the time of the laser lnclllem 

IN 

<s 

leNW 

rsw 

("'NE 

rse: 

("'E 

rw r NMe/Hover 

Whet phase{s) of !light were you In during tho laser Incident? (check all !hat apply) 

0 Taxi 0 Takeoff D Climb to allltude 0 Cro!se eUitude 

D Descent 

D Hover 

D Final approach 

D Olher (specify) 

0 Landing D Low-altitude (<500 ft. AGL) level flight 

EFFECT ON FLIGHT 

Interference: Did lhe laser mumlnotlon Incident Interfere with your performance of plio! or crewmember dulles 

during the ll!ght? 

('Yes \o No 

If you selected 'Yes" above, how did the raser Illumination Interfere with your plio! or crewmembar duties? 

Flight Path: Did the laserlllumlnalicn cause the pllollcrew member to change lhe aircraft flight path? 

r No change In ftlght path {e Mlrtor or non-adverse change (' Major or adverse change 

O!srupllon of Mission: Answer this question ONLY if you were cond<1cting law enforcement, medical or military flight 

operations during the time of the laser illumination Incident. Old the laser illumination Incident disrupt your miSsion? 

('Yes r. No 

If you selected 'Yes" above, haw did the laser illumination Interfere with your mission? 

The ftlght was on operational patrol and was returning towards Napa, the home base. The flight diverted from returning 

Exhibit 2 

3 

.. 
I certify this lOP is a 

Certified true copy. 

David T. Jensen 

/:?-To/~ Dated 1/9/20/5 

Exhibit 2 

4 
LASER INFORMATION 

Color of !he laser light? (If multi-colored, check all that apply) 

a Red a Blue ~ Green D Yellow g Orange [g] While [Qj Purple 

0 Olher (specify) 

Tracking: Olcl the laser beam appear to deliberately track the aircraft? 

(o' Yes (' No r Unsure/other (speclly) ,----------------------------------; 

Cockpit Iilumlnatlon: Old the laser beam enler through !he wlnc!screen ancllllumlna!e any part of !he cockpit? 

(i Yes (' No (' Other {specify) 

Eye exposure: Ole! the the laser beam light shine dlrec~y lmo one or both of your eyes? 

(' Old no! shine dlroclly In my eye(s) (' Shioad a little in my ays(s) (i Shined brighlly In my eye(s) 

~ EFFECT ON YOUR EYE(S}~ Ans\·.e1 qL est1ons b<:!fO'.'/ ONLY if !he laser beam shined a ltltle or brigh::l~'m yot:r eye(s) 

Old you e)t!lerisnce any adverso \IIS!ON eFFeCTS* from the exposure? (check all that may apply) 

0 Did nat experience adverse vision affects 

IZJ Glare (could not see past the light while It was In your eye(s)) 

IZJ Temporary flash blindness and/or after Images (similar to a camera flash) 

DOne or more blind spcl.s {spots In visual field lasting longer than 5-10 minutes) 

0 Blurry vision 

D Slgnllk:ant lass ro:.;f n:.;lg:::h::..l v:.;ls:.;lo:.;n _________________________ ___, 

0 Otller (specify) 

~----------------------------------------~ 

-~~Examples of common vision effects 

Glare: A temporary disruption in vision caused by the presence of a bright light (such as an oncoming cars headlights) within 

on Individual's 1/e/d ofvl5/an. Glare lasts only as long as the bright light Is actually present within the Individuals field of vision. 

Flash blindness: A temporaryv/suallnterference effect that persists arterthe source of the Illumination has ceased, similar to 

a bright camera flash. 

After Image: An Image that remains In the visual field after an exposure to a bright light. 

Blind spot: A temporary or permanent loss of vision of port afthe visual field. Unlike an after Image, a blind spot does not 

fade, or fades very slowly (taking many minutes, hours or days to fade our). 

Old you experience any adverse PHYSICAL EFFECTS from ll"le exposure? (check all that may apply) 

0 Did not experience adverse physical effects 

0 Walertng eye(s) 

IZJ Eye(s) discomfort or pain 

0 Headache 

0 Feeling of shook 

0 Disorientation orr~dl~zzl="="~ss:.._ ____________________________ ., 

0 Other (specify) I scratchiness in left eye 

Did you rub your eye{s) after the exposure? 

(' No signlftcant rubbing CO". Rub bad V1em a little \ Rubbed them vigorously 

'._I_ l_:j •.; 

Exhibit 2 

5 
I certifY this lOP is a 

Certified true copy. 

David T. Jensen 

//--T g~ Dated 1/9/2.iff5 

Exhibit 2 

6 
~ EYE EXAM RESULTS: :Ans~·:t::J ques~ions b0Jow OJ\JtY jf you b?.d an eye r...xam HHer 1h<: Jaser incident ~ 

Enter the medical facility name: 

What type of doctor did the primary or most comprehensive examinolicm of your eye(s)? 

( Retinal Specialist 

( Ophthalmologist (medical doctor specializing In sya health) 

t Optometost (tests for visual acuity and eye diseases; prescribes end ffis glosses/contacts) 

( OpUctan (fits glasses/contacts) 

( Emergency room doctor, nurse or lechnlctan 

r other (specify) 

Describe the results of the medical evaluation: 

LASER INCIDENT REPOR1/NG 

Did you report the Incident to Air Traffic Control (ATC)? 

~ Did not report to ATC 

r Reported via alrcrafi radio rommunicatlon 

( Reported via phone call 

("'Reported vlla walk-In to FAA ATC faclltty 

(' Other (speolfy) 

Did you report the laser Incident to an FAA Flight standards (AFS)Ilsld office? (e.g., FSDO, CMO, CHDO) 

('Did not report to AFS 

( Reported via aircraft radio commuok:atloo 

t Reported via phone call 

(' Reported via walk~n to FAA AFS field office 

~Other (speelfy) I report forwarded to FAA Special Agent Scott Hams 

if you ral!'orted to an FAA AI'S lleld office, anlsr the name and office location 

.... >.·. 

Exhibit 2 

7 
I ce11ify this lOP is a 

Certified true copy. 

David T. Jensen 

Died1/;tffr5 

Exhibit 2 

8 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

Did you have any prior knowledge or lrafnfng on 111e hazards and effeots of IMers aimed st a p!lotlcmwmember? 

('None 

r Basic information about the hazards an<! effacts of lasers 

(o' Detalle<J, SP€c!fic Information such as hew to raccgnlze and neeover from laser illuminations 

('Simulator training or similar exposure to taser·fike mumlnations in an aviation training environment 

r Olhet (specify) 

FiailiiJ!;f~l.free to'aiit~ ~>nvi~lldilloo~ iriicrmatlon. or oom;nant& abc lit' your'fllghi, iii~ iali~f.iii'c'i~!'i!. i~~~i!Ing, , arul/iir,~J,IIiSeqtumb:iutriome: .. : ';. > ' · •.. . . · .· i ~· ~:;,"·':'/•:'::,. :•'. •g . .· 

Did you report the unauthorlzetllaeer Illumination lnoldenllo 11m Domestic lncldems Networl< (DEN)? 

\No \Yes 

What local law enforcement agency did you oonlaol? (lncluda their phone number) 

(' No arrest, or arrest unlikely 

(' Maybe, still working the case 

('Yes. arrest was made 

r Arras\ status is unknown 

(' Otl1er (specify) .---------------------------------------, 

~---------------------------------------------J 

SUBMIT COMPLETED FAA LASER BEAM EXPOSURE QUESTIONNAIRE 

Thank you for taking time to complete this questionnaire, Please "save" the completed questionnaire 

and submit to the FAA using one of the two methods described below: 

1. Attach the saved PDF to an e-mail and send to: laserreports@faa.gov 

2. Send via fax to FAA Washington Operations Center Complex (WOCC) • (202)267-5269 ATTN: DEN 

Exhibit 2 

9 
I certifY this IOP is a 

Certified true copy. 

David T. Jensen 

/~r- Dated 11972015 

Exhibit 2 

10 
DOCKETNO. FAA-2015-0639 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this date I have sent by United States First-Class mail, the 

COMPLAINANT'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS, and Exhibit C-1 with Exhibits 1 

and 2, addressed a's follows: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2Wl 000 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald 

Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Courtesy Facsimile: (202) 366-7536 

Kenneth Ray Rumberger 

2451 Church Lane, SPC 38 

San Pablo, CA 94806-5945 

Dateq.:,August 26, 2016 

c~~:-&z:~,~ j)~,c~v_ Antonia Garcia, Paralegal Specialist 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

Lawndale, CA 

4