In The Matter Of:· 

### SERVED: June 28, 2016
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS ·, . . ·. - WASHINGTON, 

## PC**F~~-,** \',: 

### ?Ci**q~ ~'-**  .**~**

DocketNo. FAA-2015-0634 IXL Premium Lubricants, Inc. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2014NM720059 Respondent

ORDER OF DISMISSAL DUE TO RESPONDENT'S CONSTRUCTIVE WITHDRAWAL
On April 6, 2016, the undersignedjudge issued an Order Directing the Parties to Meet and Confer Regarding Litigation and Scheduling Issues ("Meet and Confer Order"). The order required, 

### inter alia, the parties to submit ajointreport to the undersignedjudge within 30 days of that order. OnMay 6, 2016, Complainant filed a unilateral report, stating that attempts to meet and confer with Respondent had failed. Respondent failed to submit a report orrequest for additional time before the deadline. On May 17, 2016, the undersignedjudge issued an Orderto Show Cause and Provide Requested Information ("Orderto Show Cause"). The order required Respondent to explain the
cause ofits failure to comply withthe Meet and Confer Order and provide the information ·requested inthat same order. In the Orderto Show Cause, the undersignedjudge advised Respondent that failure to participate inthe proceedings maybe deemed a constructive withdrawalofthe request for hearing. Respondent failed to submit a report or request for additional time before the deadline. However, on June 1, 2016, MFR Global, Ltd., a creditor ofRespondent, filed a statement explaining that Respondent had ceased operations.
Discussion Respondent has failed to respond to documents sent by boththe ALJ and the FAA attorney and failed to respondto multiple orders. After Respondent filed a timely answer, amended the
answertwice, and filed an Oppositionto a Motion to Strike, Respondent stopped complying withorders from the assigned Administrative LawJudge. Complainant filed a unilateral report on May 6, 2016 indicating that attempts to meet and confer withRespondent had failed due to Respondent's failure to respond to Complainant's counsel multiple attempts to contact Respondent. According to Complainant, on May 3, 2016, Complainant's counsel left a voicemail with the representative.ofthe Respondent. After receiving no response, Complainant's counsel called again on May 5, 2016 and spoke· with an administrative assistant who "confirmedreceipt ofthe first message, stated she had passed it on to [Respondent's Head ofOperations], and indicated she would do so again.,J Respondent never returned this call. Further, Respondent has not notified either the ALJ orthe FAA attorney ofany change of address. None ofthe mail that has been sent to Respondent's address has been returned to the Office ofHearings, making it more likely than not that Respondent has received all ofthe recent orders and requests and yet has chosen not to comply. Despite receiving an Order to Show Cause, Respondent has notprovided any reason for its failure to comply with the Meet and Confer Order. Ofadditional note, the statement filed by MFR Global, Ltd. suggests Respondent may no longer exist as a corporate entity. This makes it unlikely that Respondent will respond to future orders or would appear at an eventual hearing inthis matter. Applicable Law Among otherreasons, a Respondent maybe deemed to have constructively withdrawn a request for a hearing ifthe Respondent fails to respond to ajudge's orders,2 is silent,3 orfails to appear at a hearing without good cause.4 Additionally, ifa Respondent fails to respond to documents sent to them by the ALJ or the Complainant, then such failure shall be construed as
an abandonment ofthe hearingprocess.5 Pursuant to.14 C.P.R.§ 13.215, a party may withdraw a request for a hearing withoutthe

1Agency's Resp. to Order Directing Parties to Meet and Confer Regarding Litigation and Scheduling Issues at I (May 16, 2016). 2 Blankson, Docket No. CP97EA0024 (FAA Sep. 11, 1997) (ALJ found failure to respond to previous orders constituted constructive withdrawal), aff'd, FAA OrderNo. 98p21 (Oct 9, 1998). 3 See, e.g., JAL PowerSupply, DocketNo. CP01S00015 (FAA Aug. 7, 2001) (ALJ construed Respondent's silence as a constructive withdrawal ofrequest for a hearing), appeal dismissed, FAA OrderNo. 2002-10 (Apr. 17, 2002); McDermott, FAA OrderNo. 99-8, at 1(August 31, 1999); Pierre, FAA OrderNo. 2001-8, at 5 (May 16, 2001) 4 See InsteadBalloon Services, FAA Order No. 1998-23, at 3 (Nov

..24, 1998) (affirming ALJ's decision to find constructive withdrawal when a party failed to appear atthe hearing without good cause); ApolloA & HS Company, FAA OrderNo. 2011-4, at 4 (Jan. 14, 2011) ("Apollo's failure to appear at the hearing andto pursue its request for hearing without good cause constituted a constructive withdrawal ofits request for hearing."). 5Nissen, FAA OrderNo. 2005-15, at 5 (Dec. 15, 2005).consent ofthe administrative lawjudge at any time before or during a hearing. Upon such withdrawal, the administrative lawjudge shall dismiss the case with prejudice. 

### Conclusion Based upon a review ofthe record and consideration ofthe applicable statutes, regulations, and case law, the undersignedjudge makes the following findings offact:
1. Respondent submitted a request for hearing in this matter on March 9, 2015. 2. Respondent has been served all relevant filings, including the Meet and Confer Order and the Order to Show Cause. 3. Respondent failed to comply with, or respond to, the Meet and Confer Order. 4. Respondent was advised in the Orderto Show Cause that further failure to participate in the proceedings may be deemed a constructive withdrawal ofthe request for**hearing~** 5. Respondent failed to respond to the Orderto Show Cause. 6. Respondent's failure to participate inthe proceedings in this case constitutes a constructive withdrawal ofRespondent's request for hearing. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that these proceedings are dismissed with prejudice.6

# ~;::WALD Administrative Law Judge

Attachment: Service List

6 The case now reverts to the Final Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty stage. SeeApollo at 4-5. Should either party wish to appeal this decision, they are instructed to file a notice ofappeal with the FAA decisionmaker no later than 10 days from the service ofthis order. 14 C.F.R. § 13233(a). The party must also file the notice ofappeal in the FAA Hearing Docket using the appropriate address listed in 14 C.F.R. § 13210(a). Finally, the party must perfect their appeal by filing, not later than 50 days from service ofthis order, an appeal briefwith the FAA decisionmaker. 14 C.F.R. § 13.233(c).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 Wdght Building-Suite 2W10007
·
ONE COPY
Jordan Olsen, Head ofOperations IXL Premium Lubricants, Inc., Respondent 2719 North 1600 West Pleasant View, UT 84404 TEL: 801-732-8885
Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Enforcement Division- Western Team 222 W. 7th Avenue, Box 14 Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 TEL: 907-271-5271 FAX: 907-271-2800
The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2015-0634 (Civil Penalty Action)

7 Service was by U.S

..Mail. For service in person orby 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.