Served: April 5, 2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONJ.: ,,- ·-' '. :' 1 ' OFFICE OF HEARINGS -' '/ · ·- ' 

WASHINGTON, DC 

In The Matter Of: 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3320 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2012S0700374 

Respondent 

ORDER GRANTING THE RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME AND DIRECTING/RESERVING OTHER RELIEF 

On March 16,2016 the FAA filed its Complaint (dated March 9, 2016), with the Office 

of Hearings. 

On March 30, 2016, this proceeding was assigned to the undersigned Judge. 

On April4, 2016, the Respondent, United Parcel Service Company, 1 filed an Unopposed 

Motion for Extension of Time. 

On April4, 2016, the Respondent filed a Motion to Consolidate Proceedings and Request 

for Alternative Hearing Venue ("Motion to Consolidate"). 

Brief Discussion 

1) The Respondent's Motion for Extension ofTime 

The Respondent's April4, 2016 Unopposed Motion for Extension ofTime requests an 

extension of time to file an answer or motion in response to the FAA's March 9, 2016 

Complaint. The Respondent asserts that two other pending civil penalty actions; specifically 

cases identified as FAA-2016-4261 and FAA-2015-4262, are relevant to this action. On March 

\ 

1 The FAA Hearing Docket has identified this action under the name of United Parcel Service, Inc., likely because 

that is how it was referenced by the FAA attorney in its March 16, 2016 Letter to the Hearing Docket. However, the 

underlying Complaint identifies the Respondent as United Parcel Service Company. This inconsistency will need to 

be addressed and clarified by the parties and the Court. 
11,2016, FAA~2016~4261 was assigned to the undersigned Judge. Shortly thereafter, on March 

30,2016, FAA-2015-4262 was assigned to the undersigned. 

Pursuant to the Respondent's April4, 2016 Motion to Consolidate, the Respondent 

asserts that con~olidation of the three actions for litigation would be in the interests of judicial 

economy and of both the parties. As part of the April4, 2016 Unopposed Motion for Extension 

the Respondent asserts that its Answer to the Complaint in this case should be delayed until such 

time as the Respondent's Motion to Consolidat~ on all three.actions is ruled upon. The 

Respondent also avers that the FAA counsel has stated that it has no opposition to "the requested 

extension of time" in each of the three separate cases." (Unopposed Mot. 2.) 

2) Correct Jurisdictional Caption 

In its filings, the Respondent has identified The Office of Hearings in its jurisdictional 

' 

caption as an office within the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"). This is incorrect. The 

Office of Hearings is an independent adjudicative office, located within the U.S. DOT's Office 

of the Secretary, in Washington, DC. Neither this Court or· any member of its staff are employees 

of the FAA. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.16(h)-(i), and the FAA's Rules ofPractice,2 when the 

Respondent requests a hearing in an FAA civil penalty proceeding, the case is referred by the 

FAA to the Office of Hearings for independent adjudication. The FAA Administrator has 

~xplained that providing this independent adjudication promotes the FAA's well-established 

public goal of fair and impartial decision-making: 

[U]nder the rules of practice, the adjudication function is performed initially by 

administrative law judges employed by the Office of the Secretary of the 

Department of Transportation .... Under the rule's separation requirements ... 

[the judges are not] subject to the control or supervision of any [FAA] prosecutor. 

55 Fed. Reg. 27548,27551 (Jul. 3, 1990) (Discussion ofFinal Rule). 

2 The Rules of Practice for this proceeding are set forth in .14 C.F.R. Part 13, Subpart G. 
Thus, the words "Federal Aviation Administration" should not be used to identify the 

Court in the caption. 3 While there is no doubt that the FAA is an agency within the U.S.· 

Department ofTransportation, it should be clearly understood that the FAA is a party to these 

proceedings, and that jurisdiction for this case has been assigned to the Office of Hearings, 

which is completely separate and independent from the FAA. 

B. Conclusion 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 13.205(a)(6), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, regulations, 

statutory authority, and being fully advised; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The Respondent's Motion for Extension of Time is granted. The Respondent's answer or 

motion in response to the March 9, 2016 Complaint shall be due twenty (20) days after a 

ruling is issued on the Respondent's Motion to Consolidate. 

2. The Respondent's Motion to Consolidate is reserved. 

3. On or before April18, 2016, the FAA shall file a Response to the Respondent's Motion 

to Consolidate. This Response should also address the venue issue. 

4. Both parties shall properly identify the Court in the jurisdictional caption of all future 

filings in this case. The correct caption is identified on page one (1) of this Order. 

J:,.aw Judge 

Attachment: Service List 

3 The Respondent herein is not the first to make this jurisdiction caption error. See, e.g., Jet Logistics, inc., FAA20 13-0290, (Order Granting Protective Relief and Directing Procedural Compliance, May 29, 20 14); Endless · 

Mountains Air, Inc., FAA-20 13-0848, at 2 (Order Setting Motion Deadlines, Mar. 18, 2014); and Compass Systems 

& Sales, inc., FAA-2015-2440 (Order ClarifYing Court J\}risdiction and Directing Procedural Compliance in Future 

Filings, Feb. I 8, 20 16). · 
Docket No. FAA~2015-3320 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

Mr. Ryan Landers 

Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Enforcement Division, Southern Team 

1701 Columbia A venue 

College Park, GA 30337 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

Mr. Paul Alp 

Respondent's Counsel 

CROWELL & MORING LLP 

1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20004 

TEL: 202-624-2500 

FAX: 202-628-5116 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

US. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

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

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

ONE COPY 

Mr. Winston E. Miller 

Respondent's Counsel 

Frost, Brown, Todd, LLC 

400 Market Street, 32nd Floor 

Louisville, KY 40202-3363 

TEL: 502-589-0296 

FPC(: 502-581-1087 

Ms. Meaghan G. Byrd 

Respondent's Counsel 

Alston & Byrd LLP 

One Atlantic Center 

1201 W. Peachtree Street 

Atlanta, GA 30309-3424 

TEL: 404-881-7245 

FAX: 404-253-8510 

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 2W1000, Washington, 

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