FAA 0 Trappy 1: That's an excellent way of stating it. The Judge's order is at http://www.scribd.com/doc/211088332/Pirker-Decision . Andy.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/06/us/drone-pilot-case-faa/index.html Pirker's attorney, Brendan Schulman, called it "a tremendously significant decision for model aircraft and commercial drone operators." "As a general matter, the decision finds that the FAA's 2007 policy statement banning the commercial use of model aircraft is not enforceable. It would appear to me to have a very significant impact on other operators," Schulman said. Colin
Clearly a shot across the FAA’s bow. All of us should consider this A Good Thing. However, there are a lot more hurdles to overcome. But hopefully this might accelerate us towards some eventual resolution that will allow this nascent business to come out of the shadows.
Well, the FAA decided to appeal [to full NTSB - edit]. That means [if they win - edit] it goes to the U.S. District Court of Appeals, Washington, D.C. - home of, wait for it, the FAA. http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=15894&cid=TW209
That's going to be an interesting appeal. The logic of the Court's opinion seemed impeccable to me. Andy.
Actually it goes to the full NTSB board. After that it could go the the Federal District court. It is very seldom that the full NTSB board members over ride an ALJ decision, at least on airplane rulings. I believe all of these cases stay in the DC circuit. Guess it could go to the Supreme Court ultimately. Maybe some with access to Lexis/Nexus could see how many times NTSB cases have ever gone that' far.
Thanks for that Gary. I didn't mean to spread misinformation, I was ridding and shooting at the time and was going to come back and edit that in. On Twitter, Trappy's lawyer is questioning "What automatic stay provision? This was a dismissal of a civil penalty". He also noted "An appeal would pose risk to the FAA because of the non-navigable airspace authority point that was not addressed." and "I am not aware of an automatic stay provision pending appeal but I am open to being provided a citation to such a rule." Other lawyers expound http://droninglawyer.com/2014/03/07/439/ Colin
Ah. Now I get it. On the matter of the FAA's statement: "which has the effect of staying the decision until the Board rules." Shulman says "Meaning Pirker wouldn't have to pay now if the situation were reversed. The case concerns a civil penalty, not an injunction." He also says "Point of procedure: A Notice of Appeal is a formality (a placeholder). FAA has 30 days to decide whether to file a brief and pursue it"
"Is it not remarkable that the common repute which we all give to attorneys in the general is exactly opposite to that which every man gives to his own attorney in particular? Whom does anybody trust so implicitly as he trusts his own attorney? And yet is it not the case that the body of attorneys is supposed to be the most roguish body in existence?" - Anthony Trollope, Miss Mackenzie, 1865.
My latest blog The Business of Drones: A Tale of Two Cities covers this topic and others: http://droneanalyst.com/2014/03/07/the-business-of-drones-a-tale-of-two-cities/ Colin
Two good takes on this: Droning Lawyer http://droninglawyer.com/2014/03/07/439/ DroneJournalism.org http://www.dronejournalism.org/news/2014/3/psdj-statement-on-faa-v-pirker-decision Colin
The FAA updated their Busting Myths about the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft page Here is a good response:FAA’s Myth Busting Page Now Mirrors Losing Pleadings I love it the lawyers are in the game now. Colin
The FAA has filed their official appeal to the full NTSB board. Story at http://www.suasnews.com/2014/04/28573/faa-appeals-trappy-ruling/ and the actual ruling at http://www.suasnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/FAA-Appeal.pdf