Skypan'S Response To The Order To Show Cause

Case: 1:13-cv-08529 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/14/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:51
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL HUERTA, Administrator, Federal
Aviation Administration,
Case No. 13-cv-08529
Petitioner,
Honorable Judge Norgle
v.
SKYPAN INTERNATIONAL INC.,
Respondent.
SKYPANS RESPONSE TO THE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
NOW COMES Respondent Skypan International, Inc. (Skypan) responds to this
Courts Order to Show Cause entered on December 3, 2013 (Docket No. 6) as follows:
1.
On December 3, 2013 this Court entered an Order to Show Cause on the FAAs
Ex Parte Motion requiring Skypan to appear before the Court on January 10, 2014 to show cause
why it should not be compelled to obey the Federal Aviation Administrations subpoena served
on it August 2, 2013. (Dkt. 6).
2.
On December 24, 2013, Skypan received a copy of the Show Cause Order
together with the petition and exhibits filed by the Petitioner.

3.
On January 10, 2014, Counsel for Skypan appeared before the Court to present
Skypans unopposed motion for an extension of time to respond to the Courts Order. (Dkt. 9).
The Court granted Skypans motion and extended the time for Skypan to respond to Order to
February 18, 2014. (Dkt. 11).
4.
On January 17, 2014, counsel for Respondent met personally with the Assistant
U.S. Attorney as Counsel for the Petitioner to discuss the nature of the proceedings, the specifics
of the requests for documents, and to describe Respondents past contacts, communications and
cooperation with the FAA in connection with its unmanned aircraft operations which it
conducted over the years.
5.
At the meeting, Respondents counsel advised FAAs counsel that Skypan
officials had met with two FAA employees (Edward L. Ortiz and Scott E. Brown) at Skypans
offices in Chicago on September 16, 2013. At that meeting which lasted about 3 hours, FAA
employees examined Skypans RPV System, and were provided an explanation detailing its
operation. Skypan described the operation of the aircraft, discussed Skypans impeccable safety
record, described Skypans numerous communications with the FAA over the past 5 years
concerning proposed rules and regulations, as well as Skypans contribution to the ongoing work
of FAA to draft and establish rules, regulations and guidelines for safe operation of unmanned
aircraft. The FAAs Inspection Question Areas is attached as Exhibit A.
6.
Contrary to the FAAs allegations of a refusal to comply with the subpoena,
Skypan has sought to comply in a manner reasonably responsive to FAAs request, and
reasonably believe it was doing so.
7.
Skypans principal objection to the FAAs subpoena is that it goes one bridge too
far in seeking documents unrelated to the specific complaint investigations. Skypan reasonably
believed, and advised the FAA that it believed that the FAA had already received a copy of all of
the requested documents from Skypans client, Macklowe Properties. At the meeting with
FAAs counsel, Skypan was advised that the FAA wanted the documents concerning the
Macklowe property regardless of their receipt from Macklowe. Skypan has now complied with
that request.
8.
Now, to the extent that FAA has clarified its request for documents Skypan has
produced those documents.
-2-
9.
On February 14, 2014, Skypan responded to the FAA subpoena issued by
Petitioner and produced responsive documents. A true and correct copy of Skypans response to
Petitioners subpoena is attached as Exhibit B.
WHEREFORE, because Skypan has complied with the request to respond to the
subpoena issued by the FAA and produced relevant documents, Respondent respectfully request
that the Courts Order to Show Cause be dismissed.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/William L. Niro
William L. Niro ([email protected])
Christopher W. Niro ([email protected])
NIRO, HALLER & NIRO
181 W. Madison, Suite 4600
Chicago, IL 60602
(312) 236-0733
Fax: (312) 236-3137
Attorneys for
Respondent SkyPan International, Inc.
-3-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that on February 14, 2014, the foregoing SKYPANS
RESPONSE TO THE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE was filed with the Clerk of Court using
the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing to the following counsel
of record. I certify that all parties in this case are represented by counsel who are CM/ECF
participants.
Katherine E. Beaumont
Assistant United States Attorney
Northern District of Illinois
219 S. Dearborn, Suite 500
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Tel: (312) 353-7223
Fax: (312) 886-4073
[email protected]
Tel: (312) 558-5600
Fax: (312) 558-5700
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Michael Huerta,
Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration
I certify that all parties in this case are represented by counsel who are CM/ECF participants.
/s/William L. Niro
Attorneys for SkyPan International, Inc.

Skypan'S Response To The Order To Show Cause

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Skypan'S Response To The Order To Show Cause

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Skypan'S Response To The Order To Show Cause

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case: 1:13-cv-08529 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/14/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:51

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

together with the petition and exhibits filed by the Petitioner.

Case: 1:13-cv-08529 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/14/14 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:52

At the meeting, Respondents counsel advised FAAs counsel that Skypan

Contrary to the FAAs allegations of a refusal to comply with the subpoena,

produced those documents.

Case: 1:13-cv-08529 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/14/14 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:53

On February 14, 2014, Skypan responded to the FAA subpoena issued by

Case: 1:13-cv-08529 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/14/14 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:54

You might also like