In The Matter Of: 

### SERVED: August 10, 2016
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

Docket No. FAA-2015-1319 WILLIAM A. CURTRIGHT ) ) ) ) ) Respondent CaseNo. 2014NM090046

ORDER SETTING A SECOND LITIGATION SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND A DEADLINE TO EXCHANGE INITIAL DISCLOSURES, AND GRANTING/DENYING OTHER RELIEF

OnMay 23, 2016, an Order Setting a Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference, and Directing the Partiesto Confer and File a Rule 26(f) Proposed Discovery Plan was filed. On July 22,2016, the FAA unilaterally filed the Complainant's Response to the ALl's Order ofMay 23, 2016-Discovery Scheduling ("FAA's Proposed Schedule"). On August 9, 2016 (11 :03 a.m.), the

### pro s·e Respondent, Mr. William A. Curtright, filed a document titled the "Respondent's Response to the AU's Order ofMay 23,2016 and Complainant's Response" ("August 9, 2016 Respondent Filing"). Among otherthings, this August 9, 2016 RespondentFiling contained an untitled motionto dismiss the action with prejudice on multiple grounds. On August 9, 2016, the parties appeared by telephone for the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference. Duringthis Conference the parties discussed a variety oflitigation procedural matters, including the content ofprior Courtrulings, the FAA's Proposed Schedule, the August 9, 2016 Respondent Filing, and the status ofdiscovery exchange.A. BriefDiscussion This briefdiscussion highlights only a few ofthe matters discussed and ruled upon by the Court duringthe August 9, 2016 Conference. 

### 1. The Parties' Motions and the Court's Orders Although proper motionpractice had been briefly addressed in prior Court rulings, 1 the parties' mostrecent filings indicated continued confusion. Both parties appeared to believe that 

### it
was properto file "responses" to court orders. In addition, the Respondent again imbedded a new, untitled motion inside a "response" document. During the August 9, 2016 Conference, the Court reviewed both its May 20, 2016 and May 18, 2016 Orders, in which it had specifically identified the need for proper motiontitles and fair notice ofmotion requests. This Ordercodities that review and discussion, with additional explanation and authority. In essence, a "plaintiff'(orin FAA civil penalty proceedings a "complainant"), is the party who initiates the action, orwho files the complaint. Plaint(ff, Black's Law Dictionary, I035 (5th ed. 1979). The "respondent" is the party who answers or responds to the plaintiff's action. Respondent, id. at 1179. Once an action is initiated and while it is pending, either party may tile motions (i.e., requests for relief) with the court, seeking rulings on disputed issues within the action. 56 Am Jur 2d Motions, Rules, andOrders§ I (2013); 27 Fed. Proc., L. Ed. Pleadings and Motions§ 62.358 (2013). When a party tiles a motion, it is the "movant."The party answering the motion is the "responding" party. Thus, a "responding" party may then file a "response" (or "opposition")to the motion? 56 AmJur 2d Motions, Rules, and Orders§§ 7-39 (2013). If allowed, the movant may thereafterfile a "reply"to the opposing party's "response."3 27 Fed. Proc., L. Ed. Pleadings andMotions§ 62.360 (2013).

1See May 18, 2016 Order Finding Good Cause for the Respondent's Untimely Answer, Denying the FAA's Renewed Motion, and Granting/Denying Other Relief, 2-3 fns. 2, 3, 4, and 5; and May 20. 2016 Order Denying the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, and Granting/DenyingOther Relief. I fn. I.
2 In different courts, the titles ofthe response may vary (e.g., answer, opposition, reply), but the concept is the same. It is a response to the opposing side's request for relief.
1 In certain courts, the rules for document titling differ. Thus, this final document filed by the movant (after leave is granted by the Court) might also be titled a "surreply." 27 Fed. Proc., L. Ed. Pleadings andMotions§ 62.7 (2013) Page 2 of5

### In stark contrastto the plaintiffand the respondent, the Court is not a party to the action. It

### is therefore not involved in the parties' motion dialogue, where the parties are explainingtheir positions on a disputed matter viaa motion, response, orreply. Afterthe parties' motion dialogue is completed, the Courtreviewsthe parties' motion, response, and reply (ifany), and "speaks through the language ofits orders." 56 Am Jur2d Motions, Rules, andOrders§ 

### 42 (2013). A Court's order is a "mandatory directive for parties to comply with its dictates." 

### !d. In its orders, the Court may "grantordeny specified relief'regardingthe disputed matter in a motion, and/or "direct a partyto take orto refrain from taking action."

### !d. Thus, ifthe Court directs a party to take action, the party must do so, in the manner specified by the Court. /d. 

### 2. FairNotice Requirements in Motions Practice 4 

### When a party files a motion, it must comply with certain "fairnotice" requirements, both in title and content. Steven Baicker-McKee, et al., Federal CivilRulesHandbook, 

### 409 (Thomson Reuters 2016); see also, 

### Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b), 10. This includes identifying the motion(s) in the title ofthe document, andthen settingforth "eachdistinct allegation" supportingeach motion request in a separately numberedparagraph. Baicker-McKee, etal., supra, 

### at 405-409. The FAA's Rules ofPractice follow this bright line motion practice, by requiringthat any general motion filed by a party must be in writing, state the reliefsought, and identify the particular grounds supportingthatrequested relief. 14 C.F.R. § 

### 13.218(b)-(c). The purpose oftheserequirements is to give clear and fair notice ofthe movant's request(s) to both the Court and the opposing party. Thatrequirement ensures that notice ofthe basis for the motion is provided to the court and to the opposingparty so as to avoid prejudice, provide the opponent with a meaningful opportunity to respond, and provide the court with enough information to processthe motion correctly. 27 Fed. Proc., L. 

### Ed. PleadingsandMotions§ 

### 62.364 (2013). When a party fails to provide fair and clearnotice ofits requests in its filed documents, and instead hides a motion within adocument (e.g., imbedding an untitled request in a document,

4 This information was provided in the CoUit's May 20,2016 Order Denyingthe Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. and Granting/Denying Other Relief(May 20, 2016 Order, 2. A), but is repeated here with additional explanation and authority. Page 3 of5"grouping" multiple requests under a single motiontitle, etc.), such failure to provide fair and clearnotice ofthe motion is a serious flaw, and may result in the flawed motion being struck or dismissed. (Baicker-McKee, et al., supra, at 411.) 3. Respondent's RenewedAugust 9, 2016 Motionto Dismiss As noted above, on August 9, 2016 (11 :03 a.m.), theprose Respondent, Mr. William A. Curtright, filed a document titled the "Respondent's Response to the ALJ's OrderofMay 23, 2016 and Complainant'sResponse" ("August9, 2016 Respondent Filing"). Among otherthings, this August 9, 2016 RespondentFiling contained an untitled motion to dismiss. During the August 9, 2016 (1:30 p.m.) Conference, the Court referred the Respondent to its May 20, 2016 Order, in which it had specifically discussed the need for fair notice ofmotion requests. The Courtalso discussed with the Respondent howthe May 20, 2016 Orderhad contained a thorough review and ruling on the Respondent's January 19, 2016 Motion to Dismiss. As noted by this CourtonAugust 9, 2016, the Respondent appeared unfamiliar with the Court'sMay 20,2016ruling. It also appeared that the Respondent's untitled August 9, 2016 Motion to Dismiss was areiteration ofthe same facts and argument submitted by the Respondent in its January 19,2016Motion, which had already been considered and ruled upon. Thus. even 

### if the untitled and flawed August 9, 2016 Motion to Dismiss was accepted for consideration by the Court, it appeared to simply repeat facts and arguments that the Court had already specifically reviewed and denied. B. 

### Conclusion Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 

### §§ 13.205, 13.220, and Civ. R. 16, and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, regulations, statutory authority, and being fully advised;

Page 4 of 5

### IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. 

### September9, 2016: Deadlinefor Initial Disclosures. To ensure thatthe parties have sufficient timeto address all issues in dispute, the parties shall serve each other with initial disclosures (as described in Civ. R. 26(a)(1)(A)(i), (ii), and (iii)), on orbefore September 9, 2016, without waiting for a specific discovery request. 2. 

### September20, 2016 (1:30 p.m. ET): Second Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference. The parties shall appearby telephone on Tuesday, September20,2016, at I:30 p.m. Eastern time for a Second Rule 16 Litigation SchedulingConference. To access the Conference line, the parties shall dial 888-278-0296 and entercode 5851842.
3. The parties shall comply with fair and clearnotice motion practice, as discussed in this and prior Orders, in all future document filings.
4. 

### On or before September9, 2016, the FAA shall provide a specific commencement date for the alleged violation in this action.
5. The Respondent's August 9, 2016 untitled Motion to Dismiss is a reiteration ofits January 19, 2016 Motion to Dismiss. The discussion regarding the January 19, 2016 Motion to Dismissis therefore referenced and adopted herein, and the August 9, 2016 untitled Motion to Dismiss is denied.
6. For clarifications ofthis orderorquestions with regard to the procedures to be followed in this case, please contact Mr. Cody 

### L. Smith, Attorney-Advisor at the Office of Hearings (202-366-6941).

Attachment: Service List

Page 5 of 5

### • DocketNo. FAA-2015-1319 (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 DocketClerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W10005



### Mr. David F. Shayne Complainant's Counsel Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 Federal Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98057 TEL: 425-227-1847 FAX: 425-227-1007 Dr. William Ames Curtright, DBA Re.\pondent P.O. Box 1350 Jefferson, OR97352 TEL: 503-209-7388 FAX: 503-485-0812 Judge J.E. Sullivan U.S. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 ONE COPY

5 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-Suite2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.