14 C.F.R. § 21.95
Approval of minor changes in type design
Minor changes in a type design may be approved under a method acceptable to the FAA before submitting to the FAA any substantiating or descriptive data.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2016–2021 · leading case: Jill Sikkelee v. Precision Airmotive Corp, 907 F.3d 701 (3rd Cir. 2018).
Jill Sikkelee v. Precision Airmotive Corp, 907 F.3d 701 (3rd Cir. 2018). “(quoting 14 C.F.R. § 21.95 ). A minor change "is one that has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength, reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting the airworthiness of the product.”
Sikkelee Ex Rel. Est. of Sikkelee v. Precision Airmotive Corp., 822 F.3d 680 (3rd Cir. 2016). “4-l(a), 4-2 (2011), and for “minor changes” requires the manufacturer to comply with a pertinent “method acceptable to the FAA,” 14 C.F.R. § 21.95 . B. Factual History This case involves alleged manufacturing and design defects in a Textron Lycoming O-320-D2C engine (“the…”
Sikkelee v. AVCO Corp., 268 F. Supp. 3d 660 (M.D. Penn. 2017). “at 5 ■(citing 14 C.F.R. § 21.95 ). “[N]o matter what role a manufacturer plays in the type-certification process, the decision to approve the- type design ultimately rests with the FAA.”
Specter v. Rainbow King Lodge, Inc. (D. Alaska 2021). “The Montalvo regulations specifically governed the “familiar litany of warnings—[that] seatbelts should be worn low and tight around the hips; the seat cushion can be used as a flotation device[.”
Valley Fresh Produce, Inc. v. W. Skyways, Inc. (D. Colo. 2019). “” 14 C.F.R. § 21.95 ; see also Docket No. 67-5 at 12-13, 53:3-17 (acknowledging that there are ways to deviate from the “STC package” if the change is considered a “minor alteration”).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.