P.S. Docket No. Thomas A. Ziebarth, Esq. Consumer Protection Office Law Department U.S. Postal Service Washington, D.C. 20260 for Complainant Martin Fogel, Esq. Respondent's notice of appeal and exceptions to Judge Sobernheim's decision take issue with the decision in toto. There is no basis either to allow the exceptions to the findings of fact or to give the slightest credence to the charge of bias.
Respondent takes exception to the conclusions of law in their entirety.
Taking the points raised by this argument in reverse order, the last sentence of the parenthetical phrase will be considered first. That sentence implies that the testimony would tend to establish very little value to term papers in the grading process. His testimony clearly establishes that term papers can play an important role in grading. The first sentence in the parenthetical phrase quoted above seems to suggest that any educational institution which relies upon a student's term paper deserves what it gets if the term paper is not the student's own work. The issue is not whether educational institutions should use term papers in their grading system but, given the fact that they do, whether Respondent may use the United States mails to obtain money in the sale of a product whose chief value is in the deception of institutions of higher education.