rI T , - ^ UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORTATIO N r V • . - FEDERA L AVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N '

WASHINGTON , D C I n th e Matte r

of: GERAL D W . KELLE R FA A Orde r

No . 2011- 8 Docke t No . CP06GL000 7 FDM S No . FAA-2006-25869 ' Served : Jun e 13 , 201 1 DECISIO N AN D ORDER ' B y FA A Orde r

No . 2011-2 , date dJanuar y 11,2011 , th e Administrato r construe d Responden t

Geral dW . Keller' s motio n t o vacat e th e ALJ' s Jul y 24 , 2007 , orde r a s a n appea l brie f

an dgrante dth e FA A additiona l tim e i n whic h t o fil e arepl y brief. Th e FA A filedit s repl y brie f

i n atimely fashion . After consideratio n o f

th e brief s an dth e recor di

n thi s case , Keller' s appeal i s granted , an dth e ALJ' s orde r dismissin g th e proceeding s i s modifie dt o b e with prejudic e i n accordanc e with 1 4 C.F.R . § 13,215 . I . Backgroun d A summaj y o f

th e histor y o f

thi s cas e follows . 9/22/0 6 Th e FA A file dacomplaint , allegin g tha t Kelle r violate d 4 9 U.S.C . § 46318 ^ b y pushin g an darguin g wit h othe r passenger s

' Generally , material s file

di n th e FA A Hearing Docke

t (excep t fo r material s filedi

n securit y cases ) ar

e als o availabl e fo

r viewin g a t http://www . regulations , g o v . Se e 1 4 C.F.R . §13.2]0(eXl) . ^ Th e Administrator' s civi l penalt y decisions , along wit

h indexeso f

th e decisions , the rule s o f practice , an

dothe r infomiation , ar

e availabl e o

n th e Interne

t a t th e following address : wwwJaa.gov/about/o^icej>rg/headquartersj}ffices/agc/poljidjudicatJon/AGC40D/ Civil_Pemlty . See 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.210(e)(2) . I n addition , Thomso

n Reuters/Wes t

publishe s Federa l Aviatio n Decisions . Finally , th e decision s ar e availabl e through LEXI S (TRAN S library ) an dWestLa w (FTRAN-FA

A database) . Fo

r additiona l information , seeth e We

b site . ^ Section 4631 8 provide s that : A n individua

l wh o physically assault s o r threaten s t o physically assaul t amembe r o f th e flight cre w o r cabi n cre w o f acivi l aircraf

t o r an y othe r individua l o n the aircraft , o

r take s6/7/0 7

7/3/0 7

7/19/0 7 1I2AI0 1 

### imio i prior

t o tak e of

f o n boar da

n aircraf t operate db y Ai r

Tra n Airway s o n Decembe r

18 , 2005 , an dseekin g a$2,50 0 civi l penalty . Th e FA A fileda

n amende dcomplain t

a s amatte r

o f right unde r 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.214 /

addin g th e allegation s tha t Kelle r violate d1 4 C.F.R . § 121.580 ^ b y interferin g with crewmember s i n th e performanc e o f

thei r dutie s o n tha t

flight becaus e i t

wa s necessar y fo r

th e captai n t o de'viate fro mhi s dutie s t o speak with Kelle r abou t hi s disruptiv e behavio r

an dfor th e cre w t o ge t

th e loca l authoritie s t o remov e Kelle r fi-omth e flight. Th e AL J issue da

n orde r strikin g th e amende dcomplain t an d instructin g th e FA A tha t

i t coul dinitiat e ane w proceedin g allegin g tha t Kelle r violate deithe r

4 9 U.S.C . § 4631 8 o r

1 4 C.F.R . § 121.580 , o r

both . Th e FA A filed amotio n t o withdra w th e origina l complain t withou t prejudice . Th e AL J grante dth e FAA' s motio n t o withdra w th e complain t withou t prejudice . Kelle r filed amotio n t o vacat e an dse t asid e th e ALJ' s Jul y 24 , 2007 , orde r

grantin g th e FAA' s motio n t o withdra w th e complain t withou t prejudice , arguin g tha t

unde r 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.215, ^ th e dismissa l shoul dhav e bee n with prejudice . an y action tha

t pose s a n imminen

t threa t t o the safet y o f th e aircraf t o r othe r individual s o n the aircraf

t i s liabl e to th e UnitedState s Governmen t fo r acivi l penalt

y of no t mor e tha n $25,000 . * Unde r 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.214(b)(1) , th e complainan t doe s no t nee dth e consen

t of the AL J t o amen dacomplain

t an dth e responden

t doe s not nee dth e consen

t of th e AL J to amen da n answe r a s long a s th e amendmen

t i s file dno t late r tha n 1 5 day s befor

e ascheduledhearin g date . I n thi s case , th e AL

J ha dnot yet scheduledth e hearing . ' Section 121.58 0 provide s tha t "n o perso n ma

y assault , threaten , intimidate , or interfer e wit h acrewmembe

r i n th e performanc e of

th e crewmember' s dutie s aboar da n aircraf t bein g operate dunde

r thi s part. " ^ Sectio n 13.21 5 provides : A t an y tim e befor e or durin g ahearing , a

n agency attorney ma

y withdra w acomplain

t or apart y ma y withdra w areques t

fo r ahearing withou

t the consen

t of th e administrativ e la w judge . I

f a n agenc y attorney withdraw s th e complain

t o r apart y withdraw s the reques t fo r ahearin g an

dth e answer , the administrativ e ta w judg e shall dismis s the proceeding s unde

r thi s subpar

t wit h prejudice .8/21/0 7 Th e FA A issue daNotic e o f Propose dCivi l Penalt y (NPCP) . proposin g t o findtha t

Kelle r violate d4 9 U.S.C . § 4631 8 an d 1 4 C.F.R . § 121.580 , an dt o asses s a$2,50 0 civi l penalty . 3/26/0 8 Th e FA A issue daFina l Notic e o f Propose dCivi l Penalt y (FNPCP) , proposin g t o fm dtha t Kelle r violate d 4 9 U.S.C . §4631 8 an d1 4 C.F.R . § 121.58 0 an dt o asses s a$2,50 0 civi l penalty . 2/8/1 0 Th e FA A issue da n Orde r Assessin g Civi l Penalt y (OACP) , fmdin g tha t

Kelle r violate d4 9 U.S.C . §4631 8 an d1 4 C.F.R . § 121.58 0 an dassessin g a$2,50 0 civi l penalty . 3/10/1 0 Kelle r

filedhi s Petitio n fo

r Revie w an dDismissa l o f Orde r Assessin g Civi l Penalt y with Prejudic e and/o r Appellant* s Brie f 1/U/ l 1 Th e Administrato r issue dFA A Orde r

No . 2011-2 , construin g Keller' s motio n t o vacat e a s anotic e o f appea l fro mth e ALJ' s orde r dismissin g th e proceeding s withou t prejudice , a s wel l a s a

n appea l brief

, an dgrantin g th e FA A additiona l tim e i n whic h t o file arepl y brief. O n Februar y 14 , 2011 , th e FA A filed adocumen t entitle d"Complainant' s Repl y i n Oppositio n t o Respondent' s Motion t o Vacat e date dJul y 30 , 200 7 a s Ordere db y th e Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Decisio n Make r Januar y 11 , 2011. " I n it s reply , th e FA A request s tha t

Keller' s motio n t o vacat e b e denied . Th e FA A argue dtha t afte r th e AL J struc k th e amende dcomplaint , th e FAA' s onl y option , i f i t wante dt o procee dwith th e allegation s relate dt o Sectio n 121.580 , wa s t o file amotio n t o withdra w th e complain t withou t prejudic e an dt o issu e ane w NPCP . Th e FA A asserte dtha t i t filedit s motio n t o withdra w th e complain t

withou t prejudic e unde r

1 4 C.F.R . § ,13.218(a) , whic h provide s tha t " apart y applyin g for

a n orde r o r rulin g no t

specificall y provide di n thi s subpart shal l d o s o b y motion. " Th e FA A explaine dtha t

th e AL J "fashione darelie f equitabl e t o bot h parties, " allowin g th e FA A t o withdra w it s pendin g actio n an dt o initiat e ane w civi l penalty actio nincludin g th e allegation s relate dt o aviolatio n o f Sectio n 121.58 0 s o a s t o affordKelle r du e proces s o n th e "new " allegations . (Repl y a t 5. ) Accordin g t o th e FAA , whil e thi s relie f wa s no t explicitl y authorize dunde r th e Rule s o f

Pracfice , i t

"equitabl y address[ed ] th e rights o f

bot h partie s an dth e publi c interes t i n ai r carrie r safety. " (Repl y a

t 5. ) Th e FA A state dtha t

althoug h a

n "a n argumen t

may li e agains t

th e statutor y allegatio n [4 9 U.S.C . § 46318 ] bein g recharge dsinc e i t ha dbee n asserte di n th e previou s complaint.. . tha t

argumen t

doe s no t exis t wit h regar dt o th e Sectio n 121.580.. . violation, " becaus e th e ALJ ha drule dtha t i t wa s ane w charge . (Repl y a t 4.) ^ Th e FA A conclude dit s brie f b y requestin g th e Administrato r t o issu e a declarator y statemen t

regardin g th e validit y o f th e OAC P issue di n th e secon dcivi l penalt y actio n i f

th e Administrato r

grant s Keller' s appeal . Th e FA A requeste dfurthe r tha t i f th e Administrato r

fmd s tha t

th e OAC P i s invalid , tha t th e Administrator : 1 . permi t th e FA A t o withdra w it s motio n t o withdra w it s origina l complain t an drevers e th e ALJ' s initia l decisio n denyin g th e FAA' s reques t t o amen dit s complaint ; 2 . o r i n th e alternative , gran t

th e FAA' s "retroactiv e right t o proceed , o n it s the n timel y filedallegation s relativ e t o th e "new " violation s o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 121.580. " (Repl y a

t 5. )

' Th e Administrator

doe s not agre e wit h thi s contention . Unde

r th e doctrin e oire s Judicata , asubsequent

lawsui t i s barre di

f (1 ) th e tw o suit s involv e th e sam e clai mo r caus e o f action ; (2 ) th e earlie

r suit reachedafinal

judgment o n th e merits ; an

d(3 ) th e tw o suit s involv e identica l partie s an

dprivies . Mpoyo v

. Litton Electro-Optical Systems ^ 43 0 F.3 d985 , 98 7 (9**

* Cir . 2005) . Regardin g th e first

prong , court s conside

r whethe r th e tw o suit s involv e th e sam e transaction . Id . I

f th e tw o suit s involv e th e sam e cor e facts an dcoul db e conveniently trie di n one suit , then th e suit s involv e th e sam e clai mor caus e of action , satisfying th e first

prong o f th e tes t fo r re s judicata . Th

e tw o civi l penalt

y action s i n thi s cas e clearly aros e fromth e sam e transaction , /.e. , Keller' s allegedly disruptiv e behavior o n boar da n Air Tran s Airway s flight . Regardin g th e secon

dprong , adismissa

l wit h prejudic e i s afinal

judgmen t o n th e merit s fo

r re s judicat apurposes . NB N Broadcasting , Inc. , v. Sherida n Broadcastin g Networks , Inc. , 10 5 F.3 d 7 2 (2 dCir . 1997) . Th e partie s i

n bot h civil penalt

y action s wer

e identical , thereb y satisfying the thir dprong o f th e tes t fo r re s judicata .II . Discussio n Whil e th e FA A may b e correc t tha t th e ALJ' s orde r

dismissin g th e cas e withou t prejudic e provide drelie f tha t wa s equitabl e t o bot h th e FA A an dKelle r unde r th e peculia r circumstance s o f

thi s case , tha t

relie f wa s unavailabl e unde r

Sectio n 13.215 . Tha t rul e specificall y prescribe s tha t i f th e FA A withdraw s th e complaint , th e AL J "shal l dismis s th e proceeding s .. . with prejudice. " 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.215 . Sectio n 13.218' s provisio n tha t

apart y ma y file amotio n requestin g a n orde r no t specificall y provide dfo r i n th e Rule s o f

Practic e doe s no t

authoriz e th e AL J t o dismis s acas e withou t prejudic e contrar y t o Sectio n 13.215' s explici t requiremen t

tha t th e dismissa l b e with prejudic e whe n acomplain t

i s withdrawn . Granted , th e AL J create dth e "inequity " tha t h e trie dt o fix i n thi s cas e b y ignorin g Sectio n 13.214(b)(l)' s explici t languag e permittin g th e FA A t o amen dit s complain t

withou t th e ALJ' s consent. ^ However , th e ALJ' s orde r strikin g th e amende dcomplain t

i s no t o n appea l and , therefore , i s no t befor e th e Administrato r a t thi s time. Moreover , th e FA A ha dth e optio n t o file a n interlocutor y appea l fromth e ALJ' s orde r

strikin g th e amende dcomplaint . I n ligh t o f th e foregoing , Keller' s appea l fro mth e ALJ' s orde r dismissin g th e proceeding s withou t

prejudic e i s modifie dt o b e adismissa l with prejudice .

* Th e AL J ha dnot yet scheduledth e hearin g whe n th e FA A filedth e amendedcomplaint b y right unde r 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.214(b)(1) . I f th e A U wa s concernedabou t th e FA A adding allegation s regardin g Section 121.580 , he coul dhav e permittedtime fo r discover y an dmotion s regardin g th e ne

w allegations , rathe

r tha n takin g th e draconia

n ste p of striking th e amended complain t contrar y t o 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.214(b)(1) .Th e FA A ha s askedfo r adeclarator y rulin g regardin g th e statu s o f it s orde r assessin g a$2,50 0 civi l penalt y for violation s o f

4 9 U.S.C . § 4631 8 an d1 4 C.F.R . § 121.58 0 i n th e secon dcivi l penalt y actio n agains t Keller . Thi s reques t

mus t b e rejecte d becaus e neitiie r

4 9 U.S.C . § 46301(d)(7 ) no r 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.23 3 autiioriz e tiie Administrato r

t o issu e adeclarator y judgmen t pertainin g t o a n orde r

assessin g civi l penalt y issue db y th e FA A i n acivi l penalt y actio n tha t i s no t th e subjec t

o f a n appeal . 

# T^^^^i ^ i^i^M. ^ J . RANDOLP H BABBIT T ADMINISTRATO R Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n