U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

FEDERALAVIATION ADMINISTRATION, Complainant, FAADocket No. 2015-0208

vs. 

# RECEIVED WEBGISTIX CORPORATION, Respondent. 

## APR 202015 HEARING DOCKET HONORABLE RICHARD GOODWIN ANSWER Webgistix Corporation ("Webgistix"), bycounsel Patrick G. Byrne, Esq. and Justin 

### A. Shiroff, Esq., hereby files its Answerpursuant to Rule 209 oftheRules ofPractice (14 C.F.R. 13.209), and states as follows: I. I. Webgistix admits the factual and procedural allegations setforth inParagraph 1. II. 2. Webgistix admits the factual allegations inParagraph 2. 3. Webgistix admits the factual allegations inParagraph 3. 4. Webgistix admits the factual allegations inParagraph4. 5. To the extentthat Paragraph 5 alleges thatWebgistixknew or should have known that the shipmentrequired either a Shipper's Certification orDeclarationofDangerous Goods, Webgistix denies the allegations. Webgistix admits the remaining factual allegations. 6. Webgistix is without sufficient knowledge or informationto admit or deny the allegations inParagraph 6. 7. Webgistixis without sufficient knowledge or informationto admit ordeny the allegations inParagraph 7. 8. Webgistix is without sufficientknowledge or informationto admit ordeny the

21338552_1allegations inParagraph 8. 9. Webgistix is without sufficient knowledge orinformationto admit or deny the allegations inParagraph 9. 10. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph I0. 11. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 11. (a). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (a). (b). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (b). (c). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (c). (d). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (d). (e). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (e). (f). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (f). (g). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (g). 12. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph 12. (a). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (a). (b). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (b). 13. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 13, including discrete subparts (a)

- (d). (a). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (a). (b). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (b). (c). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (c). (d). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (d). 14. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph 14. 15. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph 15. 16. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 16. 17. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph 17. 18. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 18. 19. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 19. 20. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph20.

- 2- 21338552.!21. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph 21. 22. Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in Paragraph22. 23. Webgistix denies the allegations setforth inParagraph 23. III. 24. Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in Paragraph 24, including discrete subparts (a)- (ff).

21338552.1 (a). (b). (c). (d). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (a). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (b). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (c). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (d). (e). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (e). (f). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (f). (g). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (g). (h). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (h). (i). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (i). 

### G). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph

### G). (k). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (k). (l). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (l). (m). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (m). (n). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (n). (o). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (o). (p). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (p). (q). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (q). (r). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (r). (s). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (s). (t). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (t). (u). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (u). (v). Webgistix denies the allegations setforth in subparagraph (v).

- 3

-

### (w). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (w). (x). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in 

### subparagraph (x). (y). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (y). (z). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (z). (aa). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (aa). (bb). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (bb). (cc). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (cc). (dd). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (dd). (ee). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in subparagraph (ee). (ff). Webgistix denies the allegations set forth in 

### subparagraph (ff). 25. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph 25. 26. Webgistix denies the allegations set forth inParagraph26. Affirmative Defenses 

### FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Pursuantto 49 U.S.C. 5123(c), the alleged circumstances ofthe incident do notwarrant a monetary civil penalty. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Webgistix reserves the rightto amend his answer and to raise additional defenses thatmay arise during the course ofthis litigation.

PRAYERFORRELIEF

21338552.1 

### Webgistixrequests thatthe Administrative LawJudge: a) Findthat Webgistix is not in violation ofDepmiment ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations; b) Find that Webgistix should pay no monetary civil penalty for any alleged violation; c) Enter a decision in

### favor ofWebgistix; e) Award Webgistix such otherreliefdeemed appropriate.

- 4-Dated: April 17, 2015

21338552.1 SNELL & WILMER LLP
By: 

# 'ii/f.i(

**Pa~** 

# yme NevadaBarNo. 7636 Justin A. Shiroff NevadaBarNo. 12869 3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Attorneys for Webgistix Corporation



### - 5 -CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy ofthe foregoing Answer has beenmailed this date by Federal Express to the following: Hearing Docket Clerk FAA, AGC-430, Suite 2W1000 Wilbur Wright Building 600 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Hon. Richard C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransporation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 Attn: PatriciaMatthews) Rashawn Rich George Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7 Federal AviationAdministration, Southern Region 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337

DATED Aprill7, 2015.

21338552.1 (Original and One Copy)

(Sent viaFederal Express and Email: Richard.Goodwin@dot.gov and Patricia.Matthews@dot.gov)



### - 6-