i· 

SERVED· NOVEMBER 

. 14,2012 

u.s. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONR 

' OFFICE OF HEARINGS E. CEIVE' D . WASHINGTON, DC . 

. NOV 1 5 2012 

In The Matter Of: HEARING DOCKET Docket No. FAA-2011-1 005 

COASTAL AIR 

TRANSPORT, INC. 

) 

) 

) 

). 

) 

) 

Case No. 1010-S0-700037 

Respondent 

> 

ORDER GRANTING FAA'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE -l? 

AND GRANTING/DENYING. OTHER RELIEF __ , 

On October 23, 2012 the parties appeared by telephone for oral argument on the FAA's 

Motion for Hearing on Sanction Only. After discussion with the parties, and after consideration 

ofthe parties' calendars, the oral argument was continued to November 19,2012 at 1:30pm. 

That same day, on October 23,2012, an Order Granting Brief Continuance of Oral Argument 

. and Granting/Denying other Relief was filed. This Order codified in writing the October 23, 

2012 oral rulings. 

On November 6, 2012 the FAA filed the Agency's Supplemental Filing in Support oflts 

Motion for Hearing on Sanction Only. 

On November· 8, 2012 the Respondent filed the Respondents [sic] Response to FAA 

motion for Hearing on Sanction Only. 

On Friday, November 9, 2012 the FAA filed the Complainant's Motion for Continuance 

of Oral Argument. In this Motion the FAA attorney asserted she was having surgery on 

Monday, November 12, 2012, and would not be available for any proceedings from Monday, 

November 12, 2012 through Friday, November 23, 2012. The FAA attorney did not explain why 

this calendar conflict had not been proffered during the October 23, 2012 Motion Conference. 

The FAA attorney had not contacted the Respondent to advise it of the conflict, to determine if 

there would be any objection to the motion, or to discuss mutually agreeable alternate dates to 

Page 1 of 3 
offer to the administrative cqurt. The FAA attorney also did not provide the name of any 

· individual at the FAA who would be available to help answer questions about the FAA Motion 

for Continuance, or help calendar an alternate date should the Respondent agree to the relief 

requested. 

On Monday, November 12, 2012, the Office of Hearings (OH) was closed because of the 

federal holiday (Veteran's Day). On Tuesday morning, November 13, 2012, the OH attorney 

staff telephoned the FAA Office of Regional Counsel for the Southern Region, and asked to 

speak with anyone who could help with the FAA attorney's cases in her absence. The OH 

attorney spoke with Ms. Stanley, the legal assistant for the FAA attorney. !yfs. Stanley did not 

have access to the FAA attorney's calendar, could not assist with calendaring, and did not know 

of anyone at the FAA who could help with the FAA attorney's cases in her absence. 

That same morning, on November 13,2012, the OH attorney telephoned the Respondent 

to determine if it had any objection to the FAA's Motion for Continuance. The Respondent had 

not yet received a copy of the FAA's November 9, 2012 Motion for Continuance, and was 

unaware of the FAA's request. The OH attorney orally advised the Respondent of the basis of 

the FAA's Motion for Continuance, and the Respondent had no objection. The Respondent also 

provided multiple dates of availability, after November 23, 2012, for rescheduling the oral 

argument. 

In the afternoon ofTuesday, November 13, 2012, the OH attorney re-telephoned both the 

FAA and the Respondent to give them oral notice that the FAA's Motion for Continuance was 

granted. The oral argument was continued from Monday, November 19,2012 to Thursday, 

December 6, 2012 at 1:30pm.The parties were advised that they would also receive a written 

Order of Continuance in the mail. When the OH attorney contacted the FAA, he was told that 

attorney "Randy Hyman" was the FAAattorney's supervisor, and was handling the FAA 

·attorney's cases in her absence. The OH attorney asked to speak with Ms. Hyman, who was not 

available. The OH attorney then left a detailed message for Ms. Hyman on her voice mail 

message machine regarding the continuance and the new oral argument date, as well as h1s OH 

contact information if Ms. Hyman had any questions. When the OH attorney contacted the 

Respondent, he asked the Respondent for a current fax number. The Respondent stated that his 

current fax number was the same as his telephone number of record. However, the Respondent 

Page 2 of3 
was in the process of setting up a new fax machine, and asked not to receive faxes until his new 

fax system was operational (date unspecified). 

Having reviewed the case file, all pleadings and motions, all relevant caselaw, statutes, 

regulations, rules, and authority, and being fully advised; 

It Is Hereby Ordered: 

1. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205, 14 C.F.R. § 13.213, 14 C.F.R. § 13.218, and Civ. R. 56, 

the FAA's Motion for Continuance of Oral Argument is granted. 

2. The Telepho11e Motion Conference for Oral Argument on the FAA's Motion for Hearing 

on Sanction Only, currently scheduled for Monday, November 19, 2012 at.1 :30pm~ is 

continued to Thursday, December 6, 2012 at 1:30pm. All parties shall re-convene by 

telephone on Thursday, December 6, 2012 at I :30pm to present oral argument. 

3. If, upon return to the office, the FAA attorney has an unavoidable conflict with the newly 

scheduled Telephone Motion Conference for Oral Argument set in paragraph 2 supra, 

and wishes to modify the date/time of the scheduled Conference, the FAA shall first 

confer whh the Respondent about mutually agreeable alternate dates, and then the FAA 

. shall contact Attorney-Advisor Mr. Cody L. Smith at the Office of Hearings (202-366- . 

6941) as soon as possible, with at least three (3) mutually-agreed, proposed alternate 

dates/times for the Judge's consideration. 

4. The Respondent should make itself available for litigation communication by fax, 

especially given the delay the Respondent has reported experiencing in receiving U.S. 

mailings. TQ.e Respondent shall notify both the Office of Hearings and the FAA attorney 

of its new fax number as soon as its' new fax system is operational. Until that 

notification occurs, however, the Respondent's fax nmnber of record is the same number 

as his telephone number of record: i.e., 340-773-6862. 

Attachment: Service List 

Page 3 of3 
FDMS No. FAA-2011-1005 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL and FAX 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue, S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

Mr. George Logan, Agent for Service 

Coastal Air Transport, Inc., Respondent 

1131 King Street, Suite 204 

Christiansted, St. Croix, VI 00820-4971 

ONE COPY 

Mr. Michael Foster, President- by mail & fax 

Coastal Air Transport, Inc., Respondent 

P.O. Box 3985 

Christiansted, St. Croix, VI 00822 

TEL & FAX: 340-773-6862 

Ms. Rashawn Rich George, Complainant's Counsel- by mail & fax 

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 

The Honorable J.E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

1 

Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.