In the matter of 

R EIVED 

BEFORE THE MI~R 1 8 2015 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICEOFHEARINGS HEARING DOCKFT 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Docket No. FAA-2013-0291 

FAA Case No. 2011S0290032 

AIRBORNE MAINTENANCE AND 

ENGINEERING SERVICES 

Respondent 

Administrative Law Judge 

J.E. Sullivan 

RESPONDENT'S SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMISSION 

During the March 13,2015 telephonic hearing on the cross motions for summary 

judgment filed in this matter, Your Honor requested information on when Respondent disclosed 

Jeffrey Becker as a witness and how he was so described. This supplemental submission 

responds to this request. Respondent was also asked to identify the first page ofF AA Exhibit M 

to Complainant's Summary Judgment Motion as having been produced by Respondent, or not. 

Respondent was also requested to specify if Exhibit 7 to the AMES Answer in Opposition to the 

Complainant's Summary Judgment Motion was included in AMES' document production. 

Finally, Respondent was requested to indentify where in the record AMES disavowed any 

inference that the AMES response to the FAA Letter of Investigation to AMES constituted an 

admission of the violations as alleged by the FAA. 

Having previously identified Mr. Becker as an individual with general knowledge of the 

facts of this matter in the Initial Disclosures of AMES, served on January 14,2014, AMES 

subsequently identified Mr. Becker on March 6, 2014 as having "General Knowledge 

of Situation/Present at Toledo Visit" in Respondent's responses to the FAA's first round of 

discovery requests. As to the latter disclosure, Mr. Becker was listed in a compilation of names 
that was described as consisting of "a list of persons that have general knowledge of the events, 

provided insight, management direction and have perspectives in general context on the series of 

events in part or whole." Respondent's Responses to FAA's First Discovery Requests, dated 

March 6, 2014. Subsequently, on the deadline for submission of rebuttal expert disclosures 

(December 12, 2014 ), Mr. Becker was identified as being expected to testifY as an expert witness 

to rebut any expert or opinion testimony provided by Complainant's witnesses and/or as a fact 

witness who may also provide opinion testimony as permitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 

701. Consistent with the requirement in 14 C.P.R. § 13.220(i) to supplement any prior 

disclosures and discovery responses, Mr. Becker was again described to Complainant in this 

fashion on December 23, 2014 in Respondent's supplemental discovery responses. 

Mr. Becker clearly has the qualifications to testifY as an expert in this matter (see Reply 

of Respondent to FAA's Opposition to Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment at 1-4 and 

the Declaration of Jeffrey Becker attached as Exhibit I thereto), and Respondent timely disclosed 

to Complainant that Mr. Becker would be used to rebut any expert or opinion testimony proved 

by Complainant's witness, including testimony offered by Inspector Lipinski. 

Since AMES whishes to use Jeffrey Becker as an expert witness only to rebut expert or 

opinion testimony offered by the FAA's witnesses, it is important to consider the manner and 

timing of the FAA's disclosure oflnspector Lipinski as an expert witness. The FAA stated in its 

March 24,2014 discovery response to AMES that it had not yet identified which experts it will 

use, but noted that Inspector Lipinski and certain other FAA inspectors "may" be called to 

provide expert testimony. See Second Response to Respondent's First Discovery Requests, 

dated March 24,2014, included as Exhibit 2 to Respondent's Reply to Complainant's Response 

to Renewed Motion for Sanctions, dated January 5, 2015. Subsequently, the FAA did not 

2 
identify Inspector Lipinski as an expert by the prior May 2, 2014 deadline for initial expert 

disclosures since it did not provide any expert disclosures at that time. The FAA did not 

definitively identify Inspector Lipinski as an expert witness until December 1, 2014 -- well after 

the amended November 19,2014 deadline for initial expert disclosures. 

The testimony of Mr. Becker to which Complainant's counsel has objected was from the 

FAA's disposition of Mr. Becker on October 29,2014 during which he testified as both a fact 

witness and the Rule 30(b)(6) witness for the company. Mr. Becker expressed many views 

concerning this matter based on the particularized knowledge the witness has by virtue of his 

position at AMES (Director of Quality Assurance) as permitted under Rule 701 and by virtue of 

his personal knowledge of the facts of this matter having been present with Inspector Lipinski in 

Toledo on May 25,2010 to listen to his findings and to jointly inspect some of the subject 

aircraft. Mr. Becker also has personal knowledge of the facts of this matter having viewed the 

aircraft on a daily basis when they were returned to the AMES facility for repairs. See Becker 

Tr. at 75 included as Exhibit 3 to Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment. Subsequently, 

Mr. Becker executed a Declaration attached as Exhibit 1-R (as renumbered) to Respondent's 

Reply to the Complainant's Opposition to Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment that 

rebuts paragraphs 14, 18, 21, 25, 31, and 40 and other statements offered in the Lipinski 

Declaration attached to the FAA's Opposition to the AMES Sununary Judgment Motion in 

which he purportedly offers expert written testimony in rebuttal to the arguments presented by 

AMES in its Summary Judgment Motion. Mr. Becker was disclosed in the AMES Expert 

Rebuttal Disclosure as a possible expert witness to rebut any FAA expert witness, including Mr. 

Lipinski, who the FAA did not defmitively disclose as an expert witness until December I, 2014. 

3 
Respondent's counsel has verified that the first page of Exhibit M to the Complainant's 

Summary Judgment Motion was produced by Respondent in response to an FAA document 

request. 

Respondent confirms that Exhibit 7 to the AMES Answer in Opposition to the 

Complainant's Motion for Summary Judgment, consisting of a Capital Cargo Aircraft Technical 

Log Report for aircraft N287SC, was included among the documents produced by AMES during 

the discovery phase of this proceeding and marked as page 111 of such production. 

Finally, Your Honor sought information where AMES disavowed any inference that the 

AMES response to the FAA Letter of Investigation to AMES constituted an admission of the 

violations as alleged by the FAA. I direct Your Honor's attention to pages 24 through 26 of its 

Answer in Opposition to Complainant's Motion for Summary Judgment. In turn, Respondent 

cited to pages 176-180 of the deposition transcript of the AMES witness, Mr. Becker, taken by 

counsel for the Complainant on October 29,2014. 

Dated: March 17,2015 

Respectfully submitted, 

SILVERBERG GOLDMAN, L.L.P. 

Attorneys for 

AIRBORNE MAINTENANCE AND 

EN~RING S~'/V//S 

By: J;~_;~.l{~b Robert P. Silverberg, Esq. 

1101 30th Street, N.W. 

Suite 300 

Washington, D.C. 20007 

Tel: (202) 944-3304 

Fax: (202) 944-3306 

Email: rsilverberg@sgbdc.com 

4 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this 17th day of March 2015, I caused the foregoing Respondent's 

Supplemental Submission to be served upon the following: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Suite 2Wl000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

(Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430) 

Tel: (202) 267-0377 

(original and one copy by FedEx overnight delivery) 

The Hon. J.E. Sullivan 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

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

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Tel: (202) 366-2132 

Fax: (202) 366-7536 

(one copy by facsimile and First Class Mail) 

Christopher R. Stevenson, Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AS0-7 

Southern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

Tel: ( 404) 305-5200 

Fax: (404) 305-5223 

Chris. Stevenson@faa.gov 

(one copy by E-mail and First Class Mail)