Douglas Gilliss v. J. Babbitt

Good Law
446 F. App'x 888
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 10, 201110-70185California266 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Douglas Gilliss petitions pro se for review of a final order of the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) revoking his airmen certificates. We have jurisdiction under 49 U.S.C. § 1153 (a). We must uphold the NTSB’s decision unless it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or not otherwise in accordance with the law. Essery v. Dep’t of Transp., 857 F.2d 1286, 1288 (9th Cir.1988). The NTSB’s factual findings are conclusive when supported by substantial evidence in the record. Id. We deny the petition for review.

The NTSB’s order concluding that Gil-liss intentionally falsified an endorsement sicker, in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 61.59 (a)(2), is supported by substantial evidence and free of legal error. See Hart v. McLucas, 535 F.2d 516, 519 (9th Cir.1976) (the elements of intentional false statements are falsity, materiality and knowledge); see also Andrzejewski v. FAA, 563 F.3d 796, 799 (9th Cir.2009) (“The NTSB must leave undisturbed an ALJ’s credibility finding ‘unless there is a compelling reason or the finding was clearly erroneous.’ ”)

The NTSB did not abuse its discretion by revoking Gilliss’s airmen certificates. See Olsen v. Nat’l Transp.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.