1102 In re: PRIVATE JET EXPEDITIONS, INC. P.Q. Docket No. 95-0056. Decision and Order filed March 7, 1996. Failure to file an answer - Failure to provide advance notification of aircraft - Civil Penalty. Jane Settle, for Complainant. Respondent, Pro se. Decision and Order issued by Dorothea A. Baker, Administrative Law Judge. This is an administrative proceeding for the assessment of a civil penalty for a violation of the regulations notification of foreign aircraft arriving in the United States (7 C.F.R.§ 330.111) [hereinafter referred to as the regulations], in accordance with the Rules of Practice in 7 C.F.R. § 380.1 et seq and 7 C.F.R.§§ 1.130 et seq. This proceeding was instituted under the Plant Quarantine Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. § 151-167), the Federal Plant Pest Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. §§ 150aa et seq), the Act of February 2, 1903, as amended (21 U.S.C. § 111) (Acts), and the regulations promulgated thereunder, by a complaint filed on August 21, 1995, by the Acting Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture. This complaint alleges that on or about May 6, 1994, at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, in Cincinnati, Ohio, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 528/529 from Barbados, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. Also, on or about January 7, 1995, at Lambert Field in St. Louis, MO, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 801 from Mexico, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. The respondent failed to file an answer within the time prescribed in 7 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). Section 1.136(c) of the Rules of Practice (7 C.F.R. § 1.136(c)) provides that the failure to file an answer within the time provided under 7 C.F.R.§ 1.136(a) shall be deemed an admission of the allegations in the complaint. Further, the failure to file a timely answer constitutes a waiver of hearing. (7 C.F.R. § 1.139). Accordingly, the material allegations in the complaint are adopted and set forth in this Default Decision and Order as the Findings of Fact, and this Decision is issued pursuant to section 1.139 of the Rules of Practice applicable to this proceeding. (7 C.F.R. § 1.139). 55 Agric. Dec. 1102 Findings of Fact 1. Private Jet Expeditions, Inc., is a company doing business in the states of Ohio and Missouri with a mailing address of 3520 Piedmont Road, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 20205. 2. On or about May 6, 1994, at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, in Cincinnati, Ohio, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 528/529 from Barbados, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. 3. On or about January 7, 1995, at Lambert Field in St. Louis, MO, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 801 from Mexico, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. Conclusion By reason of the Findings of Fact set forth above, the respondent has violated the Acts and the regulations issued under the Acts (7 C.F.R. § 330.111). Therefore, the following Order is issued. Order The respondent is hereby assessed a civil penalty of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00)($500.00 per count)'. This penalty shall be payable to the "Treasurer of the United States" by certified check or money order, and shall be forwarded within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this Order to: United States Department of Agriculture Accounting Section P.O. Box 3334 'The respondent has failed to file an answer within the prescribed time, and, under the Rules of Practice applicable to this proceeding, the Department is not required to hold a hearing. Therefore, the civil penalty requested is reduced by one-half in accordance with the Judicial Officer's Decisions in In re: Shulamis Kaplinsky, 47 Agric. Dec. 613 (1988) and In re: Richard Duran Lopez, 44 Agric. Dec. 2201 (1985). 1102 In re: PRIVATE JET EXPEDITIONS, INC. P.Q. Docket No. 95-0056. Decision and Order filed March 7, 1996. Failure to file an answer - Failure to provide advance notification of aircraft - Civil Penalty. Jane Settle, for Complainant. Respondent, Pro se. Decision and Order issued by Dorothea A. Baker, Administrative Law Judge. This is an administrative proceeding for the assessment of a civil penalty for a violation of the regulations notification of foreign aircraft arriving in the United States (7 C.F.R.§ 330.111) [hereinafter referred to as the regulations], in accordance with the Rules of Practice in 7 C.F.R. § 380.1 et seq and 7 C.F.R. SS 1.130 et seq. This proceeding was instituted under the Plant Quarantine Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. §§ 151-167), the Federal Plant Pest Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. §§ 150aa et seq), the Act of February 2, 1903, as amended (21 U.S.C. § 111) (Acts), and the regulations promulgated thereunder, by a complaint filed on August 21, 1995, by the Acting Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture. This complaint alleges that on or about May 6, 1994, at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, in Cincinnati, Ohio, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 528/529 from Barbados, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. Also, on or about January 7, 1995, at Lambert Field in St. Louis, MO, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 801 from Mexico, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. The respondent failed to file an answer within the time prescribed in 7 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). Section 1.136(c) of the Rules of Practice (7 C.F.R. § 1.136(c)) provides that the failure to file an answer within the time provided under 7 C.F.R.§ 1.136(a) shall be deemed an admission of the allegations in the complaint. Further, the failure to file a timely answer constitutes a waiver of hearing. (7 C.F.R. § 1.139). Accordingly, the material allegations in the complaint are adopted and set forth in this Default Decision and Order as the Findings of Fact, and this Decision is issued pursuant to section 1.139 of the Rules of Practice applicable to this proceeding. (7 C.F.R. § 1.139). 55 Agric. Dec. 1102 Findings of Fact 1. Private Jet Expeditions, Inc., is a company doing business in the states of Ohio and Missouri with a mailing address of 3520 Piedmont Road, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 20205. 2. On or about May 6, 1994, at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, in Cincinnati, Ohio, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 528/529 from Barbados, in violation of 7 C.F.R. $ 330.111. 3. On or about January 7, 1995, at Lambert Field in St. Louis, MO, respondent failed to provide the Plant Protection and Quarantine Service with advance notification of arrival of an aircraft, namely, PJE 801 from Mexico, in violation of 7 C.F.R. § 330.111. Conclusion By reason of the Findings of Fact set forth above, the respondent has violated the Acts and the regulations issued under the Acts (7 C.F.R. § 330.111). Therefore, the following Order is issued. Order The respondent is hereby assessed a civil penalty of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00)($500.00 per count)'. This penalty shall be payable to the "Treasurer of the United States" by certified check or money order, and shall be forwarded within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this Order to: United States Department of Agriculture P.O. Box 3334 'The respondent has failed to file an answer within the prescribed time, and, under the Rules of Practice applicable to this proceeding, the Department is not required to hold a hearing. Therefore, the civil penalty requested is reduced by one-half in accordance with the Judicial Officer's Decisions in In re: Shulamis Kaplinsky, 47 Agric. Dec. 613 (1988) and In re: Richard Duran Lopez, 44 Agric. Dec. 2201 (1985). Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Respondent shall indicate that payment is in reference to P.Q. Docket No. 9556. This order shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and shall be final and effective thirty five (35) days after service of this Default Decision and Order upon respondent, unless there is an appeal to the Judicial Officer pursuant to section 1.145 of the Rules of Practice applicable to this proceeding. (7 C.F.R. § 1.145). [This Decision and Order became final July 29, 1996-Editor] In re: YOLANDA M. GUERRERO. P.Q. Docket No. 95-0064. Decision and Order filed April 10, 1996. Failure to file an answer - Importation of plums from Ecuador into United States Civil penalty. Susan Golabek, for Complainant. Respondent, Pro se. Decision and Order issued by James W. Hunt, Administrative Law Judge. This is an administrative proceeding for the assessment of a civil penalty for a violation of the regulations governing the importation of fruits and vegetables (7 C.F.R. § 319.56 et seq.), hereinafter referred to as the regulations, in accordance with the Rules of Practice in 7 C.F.R. § 1.130 et seq. and 7 C.F.R. § 380.1 et seq. This proceeding was instituted by a Complaint filed on September 26, 1995, by the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture. This complaint alleged that on or about January 9, 1995, the respondent imported approximately five pounds of plums (Spondias spp.) from Ecuador into the United States at Jamaica, New York, in violation of 7 C.F.R.§ 319.56,because the importation of plums from Ecuador into the United States is prohibited. The respondent failed to file an answer within the time prescribed in 7 C.F.R.§ 1.136(a). Section 1.136(c) of the Rules of Practice provides that the failure to file an answer within the time provided under section 1.136(a) shall be deemed an admission of the allegations in the complaint. 7 C.F.R. § 1.136(c). Further, the failure to file an answer constitutes a waiver of hearing. |