In The Matter Of: SCOTTTICE Respondent 

## SERVED: May 1, 2013 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC ) ) 

### ) ) ) DocketNo. FAA-2013-0042 Case No. 2012NE700211



### ORDERACCEPTING THE

### PROSERESPONDENT'S RESPONSE,· FINDING GOOD CAUSE EXISTS TO ACCEPT THELATE ANSWER, AND GRANTING/DENYING OTHERRELIEF

OnMarch 27, 2013, an Order Setting Deadline for theprose Respondent, Mr. ScottTice, to Show Cause and to File an Answer, and Granting/Denying Other Reliefwas filed. Among otherthings, this Order set a deadline ofApril24, 2013, for theprose Respondent to file an answer to the FAA'sJanuary 29, 2013 Complaint ("Complaint") and a response to the FAA's Complainant's Motion for Order Deeming Allegations Admitted and to Limit Hearingto Issue of Civil Penalty ("FAA Motion") stating why he had not filed an answer. OnApril 22, 2013, thepro se Respondent timely filed with the Office ofHearings a signed Response to the FAA Motion for Order Deeming Allegations Admitted and Answerto Complaint ofJanuary 29, 2013 ("Response"). Included inthis Response were reasons why the prose Respondent had not filed a formal Answer to the FAA's Complaint, as well as a detailed list ofresponses. The Response specifically addressed each numbered paragraph ofthe Complaint, stated affirmative defenses, and, based on the Service List attached thereto, was properly served on Complainantand filed with the Hearing Docket. In addition, among other things, thepro se Respondent noted that he had sent an email answer to the FAA inresponseto the Complaint immediately after receiving

### it. He believed he had requested the hearing properly and ina timely manner. Hehad also engaged in "multiplephone conversations" withthe FAA attorney since receivirfg the Complaint (Response, 1). Since he was not an attorney, the Respondent asked for leniency ifhe had "failedto follow the properprocedures." (Response,**2)~** Herenewedhis request for a hearing in order to enter into evidence his side ofthe events (Response, 2). The Respondent also asserted that he had tried ''to the best ofmy abilities to comply with everything thathasbeen asked ofme so far and will continue to do so." (Response, 2). After reviewing aUpleadings and documents, relevant caselaw, regulations, statutes, and being fully advised; j: 

## 40[Type text]

.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(6), the

### prose Respondent's April22, 2013 Response is hereby accepted as both a Response to the FAA's March 20, 2013 Motion and as an Answerto the FAA's January 29,2013 Complaint. 2. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.209(f) and 14 C.F.R. § 13.218, the

### prose Respondent's Response is deemed to include an inferred Motion for Extension ofTime to file an Answer. The Respondent has demonstrated good cause grounds for late filing. His inferred Motion for Extension ofTime to file an Answer is granted. The Respondent's April 22, 2013 Answer is accepted as timely filed. 3. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.218(e)(2) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 55, the FAA's Motion for Order Deeming Allegations Admitted and to Limit Hearing to Issue ofCivil Penalty onthe basis ofdefault is denied. 4. The FAA may renew or modify its Motion for Order Deeming Allegations Admitted after an examination ofthe

### prose Respondent's Answer and after discussion with the

### prose Respondent during the Rule 26(f) planning meeting. 4. Pursuantto the March 11, 2013 Order Setting Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference, and Directing Rule 26(f) Planning and Submission, the parties are to submit ajoint scheduling/discovery plan on orbefore May 9, 2013, and appear bytelephone for a Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference on Thursday, May 16,2013, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern time. 5. The

### prose Respondent shall immediately contact the Office ofHearings (202-366-6941) to provide a working telephone number so that the Office ofHearings may contact him with the conference call number and passcode for the May 16, 2013 Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference. 6. Ifeitherparty has questions about the procedures to follow inthis case, please contact Mr. Cody L. Smith, Attorney-Advisor at the Office ofHearings (202-366-6941).

Attachment: Service List

Page 2 of3[Type text]

SERVICELIST- 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 2W1000 1

Mr. R. Bennett Sargent, Esq. Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel, ANE-7 New England Region Federal Aviation Administration 12 NewEngland Executive Park Burlington, MA 01821 TEL: 781-238-7058 FAX: 781-238-7055 Mr. Scott Tice Pro se Respondent 21125 Timberland Road Barronett, WI 54813-9540 Judge J.E. Sullivan US. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S.Department ofTransportation ONE COPY

1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2132 FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2013-0042 (Civil Penalty Action)

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. Page 3 of3