Application of Leonardo Ortiz for Admission To Practice Before the Federal Maritime Commission, 58290-58291 [E9-27076]

Agencies

• Federal Maritime Commission

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 217 (Thursday, November 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58290-58291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27076]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[Docket No. 09-05]


 Application of Leonardo Ortiz for Admission To Practice Before 
the Federal Maritime Commission

Served: November 5, 2009.
By The Commission: Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr., Chairman, Joseph E. 
BRENNAN, and Rebecca F. DYE, Commissioners.

Order Denying Application of Leonardo Ortiz for Admission to Practice

    By Order served July 30, 2009, the Commission directed Respondent 
Leonardo Ortiz to demonstrate that he is qualified to practice before 
the Commission as a non-lawyer, pursuant to 46 CFR 502.27 and 502.29. 
Despite two opportunities to be heard, Mr. Ortiz did not submit 
evidence or otherwise respond to the Commission's Order. Accordingly, 
the Commission upholds the Secretary's April 15, 2009 decision letter 
to Mr. Ortiz, and denies Mr. Ortiz certification to practice before the 
Commission.

Background

    Mr. Ortiz filed an Application for Admission to Practice before the 
Commission on December 31, 2007, showing that he is self-employed and 
operating from his residence in Anderson, SC. Following discussions 
among FMC staff and further communications with Mr. Ortiz, the 
Secretary issued a decision letter on April 15, 2009, indicating the 
denial of Mr. Ortiz's application to practice before the Commission as 
a non-attorney. Among issues cited in the Secretary's decision letter 
for the determination are Respondent's lack of legal academic 
credentials and lack of relevant work experience demonstrating his 
qualifications to practice before the Commission.
    In the decision letter, the Secretary informed Mr. Ortiz of his 
right to request a hearing within twenty days, pursuant to Rule 29 of 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 46 CFR 502.29. Mr. 
Ortiz timely requested a hearing on April 29, 2009.
    Pursuant to Mr. Ortiz's request, the Commission duly served an 
Order directing applicant to show his qualifications to practice as a 
non-attorney before the Commission. The Secretary served such Order on 
Mr. Ortiz via Federal Express courier service on July 31, 2009. Mr. 
Ortiz signed a Federal Express receipt, evidencing his receipt of the 
Commission's Order. Notice of this proceeding also was published in the 
Federal Register. 74 FR 38627 (Aug. 4, 2009).
    The Commission's Order designated Mr. Ortiz as a Respondent and 
directed him to file affidavits of fact and a memorandum of law no 
later than September 4, 2009. The Order designated the Commission's 
Bureau of Enforcement (BOE) as a party, and required BOE to submit 
rebuttal affidavits of fact and memoranda of law no later than October 
5, 2009. Thereafter, Mr. Ortiz was permitted to file a reply brief no 
later than October 20, 2009.
    BOE timely submitted its memorandum of law and factual case on 
October 5, 2009. BOE's case includes the verified statement of the 
Commission's Secretary, Karen V. Gregory, which describes the factual 
background of the Secretary's review of the subject application, along 
with the Secretary's decision letter issued to Mr. Ortiz on April 15, 
2009. To date, Mr. Ortiz has not submitted evidence, any memoranda of 
law, or otherwise responded to the Commission's Order.

Discussion

    The Secretary is authorized to approve or deny an application to 
practice before the Commission. 46 CFR 501.24(a). If the Secretary 
denies an application to practice before the Commission, written notice 
is given so that the applicant can request a hearing before the 
Commission. 46 CFR 502.29. At hearing, Mr. Ortiz has the burden of 
showing the applicant's qualifications. 46 CFR 502.155.
    BOE cites the Secretary's decision letter as setting forth three 
major points which justify denying Mr. Ortiz admission to practice 
before the Commission: First, Mr. Ortiz is not a credentialed attorney 
because he does not have a license to practice law before any Federal, 
State or Territorial court. BOE Memorandum of Law at 3; Application of 
Leonardo Ortiz at 2 (Question 10); Decision Letter of April 15, 2009, 
at 1. Second, Mr. Ortiz lacks other credible proof of legal or academic 
education to justify his entitlement to practice before the Commission, 
inasmuch as the American Bar Association has not granted recognition to 
the British American School of Law, where Mr. Ortiz attended. BOE 
Memorandum of Law at 3; Application of Leonardo Ortiz at 2 (Questions 7 
and 12a); Verified Statement of Karen V. Gregory at ] 7; and Decision 
Letter of April 15, 2009, at 1. Third, Mr. Ortiz's purported work 
experience assisting attorneys in criminal, contract, torts, and 
Federal administrative law is not sufficient to make him qualified to 
practice before the Commission. BOE Memorandum of Law at 3; Application 
of Leonardo Ortiz at 2 (Questions 8 and 12b); Verified Statement of 
Karen V. Gregory at ] 7; and Decision Letter of April 15, 2009, at 2. 
Likewise, possession of a U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Marine Master 
license does not establish the requisite basis to conclude that Mr. 
Ortiz has shown the necessary ``legal, technical or other 
qualifications to render valuable service before the Commission and is 
otherwise competent to advise and assist in the presentation of matters 
before the Commission,'' 46 CFR 502.27(a)(1). See also BOE Memorandum 
of Law at 1-2; Decision Letter of April 15, 2009, at 1.
    Although Mr. Ortiz submitted several recommendations with his 
application, it was determined that these letters lacked sufficient 
information or support as to his qualifications to be admitted to 
practice before the Commission. BOE Memorandum of Law at 1-2, and 
Decision Letter of April 15, 2009, at 2. The Secretary determined that 
such letters served only to provide evidence of Mr. Ortiz's good 
character. Id.
    Despite adequate notice of the issues in the Decision Letter and 
notice of the September 4, 2009 deadline by which Mr. Ortiz should 
respond to the Order, Mr. Ortiz never submitted evidence, memoranda of 
law or affidavits to contest the Secretary's determinations.
    As the Commission explained in Revocation of License No. 016019N--
Central Agency of Florida Inc., 31 S.R.R. 486 (FMC, 2008): ``It is a 
familiar rule of evidence that the party with control of information 
relevant to a disputed issue may be assigned the burden to provide such 
information or suffer an adverse inference for its failure to 
respond,'' 31 S.R.R. at 486-7, citing Commonwealth Shipping Ltd., Cargo 
Carriers Ltd., Martyn C. Meritt--Submission of Materially False or 
Misleading Statements to the Federal Maritime Commission, 29 S.R.R. 
1408, 1412 (FMC 2003); Adair v. Penn-Nordic Lines, 26 S.R.R. 11, 15 
(ALJ, 1991), citing Alabama Power Co. v. FPC, 511 F.2d 383, 391 (D.C. 
Cir., 1974). Of similar import, an applicant who fails to meet its 
burden of contesting allegations or evidence upon a disputed issue is 
deemed to have accepted the opposing party's allegations and evidence 
as true. Revocation of License No. 016019N--Central Agency of Florida 
Inc., 31 S.R.R. at 487; Capitol Transportation, Inc. v. United States, 
612 F.2d 1312, 1318-

[[Page 58291]]

1319 (1st Cir. 1979); Bermuda Container Line Ltd. v. SHG Int'l Sales 
Inc., FX Coughlin Co., and Clark Building Systems, Inc., 28 S.R.R. 312, 
314 (I.D. 1998).
    Having requested this hearing, Mr. Ortiz has, on two separate 
occasions, neglected his opportunity to respond to those issues 
specified in the Commission's Order. In view of the uncontested nature 
of BOE's case, the Commission validly may find that Mr. Ortiz is not 
qualified to practice before the Commission as a non-attorney, as 
provided by 46 CFR. 502.27. Accordingly, the Commission upholds the 
Secretary's Decision Letter of April 15, 2009 and hereby denies 
certification for Mr. Ortiz to practice before the Commission.

Conclusion

    Therefore, it is ordered, that the Application of Leonardo Ortiz to 
practice before the Commission as a non-attorney is denied.

    By the Commission.
Karen V. Gregory,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-27076 Filed 11-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P