vC^TATiO;^U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ^ ^lu J 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION / ' ^ - 2 2i}fn 

In the matter of: 

STUART S. MACPHERSON 

FAA Docket No. CP10WP0006 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0538 

Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

MOTION TO DEEM THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT ADMITTED AND 

MOTION FOR DECISION OR, ALTERNATIVELY. 

MOTION FOR ORDER LIMITING THE HEARING TO THE ISSUE OF SANCTION 

Pursuant to Sections 13.209(f) and 13.218(f)(5) of the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil 

Penalty Actions, 14 C.F.R. §§ 13.209(f), 13.218(f)(5), the Complainant hereby files this motion 

to deem the allegations in the complaint admitted and issue an order assessing civil penalty for 

$16,200 or, in the alternative, issue an order limiting the hearing to the issue of sanction. In 

support of this motion, the Complainant states as follows: 

1. On May 19, 2010, the Complainant filed the complaint in the above-captioned 

matter with the Hearing Docket by certified mail - return receipt requested and served a copy on 

Respondent by certified mail - return receipt requested. Return receipt indicated that the 

certified copy of the complaint was received by Respondent Stuart MacPherson. 

2. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.209(a), Respondent was required to file a written 

answer to the complaint not later than 30 days after service of the complaint. Because the 

complamt was served by mail, the Rules of Practice provided Respondent an additional 5 days 

from the time prescribed to file an answer to the complaint (i.e., 35 days from the date of 
service). 14 C.F.R. § 13.211(e).* Accordingly, Respondent's answer was due no later than June 

23, 2010. 

3. As of the date of this motion. Respondent has not filed an answer.^ 

4. Respondent sent a letter to Administrative Law Judge Goodwin, dated 

June 18, 2007 [sic], indicating that he had received Complainant's letter transmitting the 

complaint to the hearing docket and accompanying request that the hearing be held in San Diego, 

CA. The postmark for this letter indicates that it was sent to Complainant on June 21, 2010. 

Respondent did not, however, file an answer with this letter. 

4. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.209(f), in civil penalty proceedings, "a person's failure 

to file an answer without good cause shall be deemed admitted an admission of the truth of each 

allegation contained in the complaint." 

5. Once the allegations contained in the complaint are deemed admitted, there is no 

genuine issue of material fact and Complainant is entitled to a decision as a matter of law under 

14 C.F.R. § 13.218(f)(5). 

WHEREFORE, the Complainant respectfully requests that the allegations in the 

complaint be deemed admitted under 14 C.F.R. § 13.209(f). The Complainant further requests 

that the law judge issue a decision and order affirming the regulatory violations and civil penalty 

of $16,200 sought in the complaint or, alternatively, issue an order affirming the regulatory 

violations alleged in the complaint and limitmg the hearing in this matter to the issue of sanction. 

' Section 13.211 (e) provides that "[wjhenever a party has a right or a duty to act or to make any response 

within a prescribed period after service by mail, or on a date certain after service by mail, 5 days shall be added to 

the prescribed period." This 5-day grace period ensures that "a party will not be penalized for unanticipated or 

unexplained delays in the mail during the grace period." 53 Fed. Reg. 34646, 34649 (Sept. 7, 1988). 

^ Before filing this motion, on July 28, 2010, undersigned counsel confirmed with the Hearing Docket that 

Respondent has not filed an answer. 
Respectfully submitted, 

Peter J. Lynch 

Assistant Chief Counsel 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

. Ponto 

(ttomey 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

800 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Telephone: (202) 267-9863 

Facsimile: (202)267-5106 

Date: July 30, 2010 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this date, I have sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, certified 

return-receipt requested and regular U.S. mail, a copy of the foregoing Motion To Deem The 

Allegations In The Complaint Admitted And Motion For Decision or. Alternatively, Motion For 

Order Limiting The Hearing To The Issue Of Sanction, in the matter of Stuart S. MacPherson, 

FAA Docket No. CP10WP0006, DMS No. FAA-2010-0538, to: 

Stuart S. MacPherson 

P.O. Box 807 

Cardiff, CA 92007 

In addition, I hereby certify that on this date, I have sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, 

certified return-receipt requested, the original and one copy of the foregoing document to: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Orville Wright Building 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

In addition, I hereby certify that on this date, I have sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, 

certified return-receipt requested, one copy of the foregoing document to: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El 2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

/7Lh/U-r^ 

Date:/July 30, 2010