(a) Filing, time of filing and service on respondent. The order of the Administrator from which an appeal has been taken shall serve as the complaint. The Administrator shall (except as provided in § 821.55(a) with respect to emergency proceedings) file the complaint with the Board within 10 days after the date on which he or she was served with the appeal by the respondent, and shall simultaneously serve a copy of the complaint on the respondent. If the Administrator has determined that the respondent lacks qualification to be a certificate holder, the order filed as the complaint, or an accompanying statement, shall identify the pleaded factual allegations on which this determination is based.
(b) Answer to complaint. The respondent shall (except as provided in § 821.55(b) with respect to emergency proceedings) file with the Board an answer to the complaint within 20 days after the date on which the complaint was served by the Administrator, and shall simultaneously serve a copy of the answer on the Administrator. Failure by the respondent to deny the truth of any allegation or allegations in the complaint may be deemed an admission of the truth of the allegation or allegations not answered. The answer shall also identify any affirmative defenses that the respondent intends to raise at the hearing. The answer may be amended to include affirmative defenses in accordance with the provisions of § 821.12(a).
Notes of Decisions
Casino Airlines, Inc. v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 439 F.3d 715 (D.C. Cir. 2006).
· cites it 2× “Before the ALJ, the FAA submitted as its complaint the “Order of Revocation,” which it is required to do under 49 C.F.R. § 821.31 (a), but Casino failed to file an answer as called for in 49 C.”
Kolek v. Engen, 869 F.2d 1281 (9th Cir. 1989).
· cites it 2× “49 C.F.R. § 821.31 (1987). In filing the complaint against Kolek, the FAA was several days late.”
Michael Huerta v. Jody Ducote, 792 F.3d 144 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
· cites it 2× “49 C.F.R. § 821.31 . Appeals are heard by an administrative law judge (“ALJ”), id.”
Randall Lee King v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 766 F.2d 200 (5th Cir. 1985).
“Thereafter, the Administrator filed his order of revocation as his complaint before the Board pursuánt to 49 C.F.R. § 821.31 (a) (1984). King moved *202 for dismissal of the complaint because of the delay between the date of the alleged offense, December 1, 1980, and the date of…”
United States v. Paul Patric McBride, 788 F.2d 1429 (10th Cir. 1986).
“49 C.F.R. §§ 821.31 & 821.35. This letter was returned to the FAA unclaimed by appellant but remailed by regular mail on March 25, 1980.”
Steven R. Cowell v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 612 F.2d 505 (10th Cir. 1980).
“49 C.F.R. § 821.31 (b) does provide that when one of the FAA’s claims against an airman is that he lacks qualifications, the complaint “shall recite on which of the facts pleaded this contention is based.”
Diaz v. Dep't of Transp., 65 F. App'x 594 (9th Cir. 2003).
“49 C.F.R. § 821.31 (c). “Failure to deny the truth of any allegation or allegations in the complaint may be deemed an admission of the truth of the allegation or allegations not answered.”
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.