Clyde Blincoe, D/B/A Instead Sky Sports v. Federal Aviation Administration

Good Law
37 F.3d 462·94 Daily Journal DAR 13340·1994 WL 513690·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 26232·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7259
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 22, 199493-70449California1,556 words

Opinion

Opinion

I.

Clyde Blincoe, d/b/a Instead Sky Sports, filed a claim with the Federal Aviation Administration’s San Francisco Airports District Office alleging the Airport Authority of Washoe County had discriminated against him in violation of 49 U.S.C.A.App. § 1349(a) by requiring him to carry a $1,000,000 comprehensive general liability insurance policy for his skydiving, hot air balloon repair and aerial photography business operated at the Reno Stead Airport while not requiring other tenants at the same airport to carry similar coverage. After investigating Blincoe’s allegation and seeking advice from the FAA’s Assistant Chief Counsel, the District Office wrote Blincoe that “the Airport Authority ... is not being discriminatory toward you and is not in violation of’ § 1349(a). Blincoe seeks direct review of this decision pursuant to 49 U.S.CAApp. § 1486(a). We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

II.

This court has exclusive jurisdiction to review “[a]ny order, affirmative or negative, issued by the Board or Secretary of Transportation ... upon petition, filed ... by any person disclosing a substantial interest in such order.” 49 U.S.C.A.App. § 1486(a). However, “[t]his power of review…

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.