Complainant(Petitioner), I (Charles Shi) submit to ARB this Reply Brief to Respondent’s Brief(OP Brief) In Opposition To Shi’s Appeal dated 16/10/2017.
Going over the whole Opposition Brief, there is no single thread of truth and fact concerning my wrongful termination by Respondent’s American citizens against my AIR21 protected activity to inform and expose an extraordinary safety threat compromising some 500 Boeing planes which is 100% under FAA jurisdiction. The safety threat, an extreme public concern was willfully concealed, badly covered up by Respondent and abused by FAA irresponsible investigation process that was being exposed through the first wave media reporting by U.S. and world reputable press. Respondent continued ONLY to rely on crooked speculation,wide fabrication, distortion, vicious smear and defamation to mislead ARB and public which is doomed to fail in the end. In terms of totality of fact and truth evidenced in the exhibits submitted,this is a very simple prima facie case however justice miscarried by ALJ due to its abuse of discretion. The ARB review and correction of the mistrial with respect to truth and fact ONLY is appealed.
Rebuttal to Respondent misleading and statement on Shi’s job nexus
OP Brief P.2 Respondent lied again: “Shi does not….ever traveled to the United States for work purpose…” (Sorry, the pardon per OP Brief P.8, I extended to Respondent counsel from Hodgson Russ LLP for not telling more lies is now suspended, and the pardon to Ms Schaefer is also revoked because the pardon… she behaves meant Ms Schaefer should have invited Joe Zou and Ms Starzak, turned themselves in for LEA questioning) See below pictures rebutting Moog deceits.
See CX41. Moog Aircraft Group HR Don Needham communication with Estella Ling, Moog Shanghai HR manager. P. 6. dated 29/08/215: “Estella, I believe you have already been contacted to assist Aircraft Group with an investigation regarding Joe Zou…” The fact is Estella is HR manager for Moog Shanghai which belongs to Moog Industrial Group, Don has to ask Estella assistance doing any and everything for Aircraft Group-Respondent.
My wrongful job termination sessions 12–13 January 2016 was handled by Satish Kumar, Joe Zou and assisted by Estella Ling. See, RX-12. P.1 Satish Kumar signature of his job title, Regional head-HR Asia Pacific, Moog Aircraft Group. If I worked for Moog Shanghai which has no US aviation nexus whatsoever by Respondent, why a Respondent, the Aircraft Group HR head had to waste Respondent money coming all the way and meddle into the lay-off of an extraterritorial company that has no connection or nexus to invincible Moog Aircraft Group?
The wrongful termination decision was truthfully stated and made by Kate Schaefer, VP of Moog Aircraft Group and executed by Joe Zou, Satish Kumar, assisted by Estella Ling. The termination agreement was signed by Joe Zou, an American citizen who’s title is Asian Supply Chain Director of Respondent. See, CX48, Exh.RF3, If I worked for Moog Shanghai which did not employ Kate Schaefer(Contrary to ALJ fabrication), why Kate Schaefer,VP of Aircraft Group had to make that lay-off decision and her favorite Moog determined ethic violator to sign off(my termination agreement)?
Respondent wasted everybody’s time making irrelevant statements, see OP Brief, P.26. “Estella employed in China, Satish Kumar, employed in India…” ,though this time Respondent was not hullucinately saying Kate Schaefer was employed by Moog Shanghai because Respondent cheered ALJ fabrication, Respondent could have self-cheatedly wished ALJ fabrication should prevail so its Shi’s libelous accusation could stand the test of public outcry.
Further clarification on ALJ abuse of discretion in ordering sanction.
Respondent’s allegation “ Shi’s willful and contumacious refusal to appear for deposition” is a smear on my truthful effort to be deposed and contrary to the fact.
In terms of ALJ accommodation, it reminds me of a joke that a rich man handed out a $100 bill to a poor man but demanded $98 change.Even though I am thankful to ALJ Morris’ only prudent judgment against Moog’s viciously intended obstruction of justice barring me to talk with press. I love America because you are the greatest democracy protecting freedom of speech, and you have laws to protect whistleblowers. I could not dare or think to file a claim if U.S. has no such a great system of legal justice.
ALJ Morris said: “it MAY BE a crime for Complainant to participate in the deposition in China, even if it was done via video”See App.Ex.6 at 3–4. This is a blatantly illicit statement made by a Judge who was hostile to a protected FAA whistleblower on a matter of 100% US aviation safety and who does not know Chinese laws. Like in U.S.,counterfeiting is a crime in China and I was exposing a verified criminal counterfeiting concerning public safety which is supported by Chinese law. Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, Article 262, “on the principle of reciprocity, the people’s courts of China and foreign courts may request each other’s assistance in the service of legal documents, in investigation and collection of evidence or in other litigation acts.”
Using unfounded guess to make his sanction decision is nothing but a show of hostility and abuse of discretion.
By precluding my testimony, especially those internal whistleblowing emails even before the DOL legal action equals to blocking the truth and fact, there is no totality to talk about with head and feet cut of the body of truth and fact.
A legal system should be based on letting nothing but truth and fact to prevail. I firmly believe US legal system is great model for truth and fact to prevail. Justice with truth and fact blockaded is justice abused.
There is no “resulting prejudice to Moog’s ability to defend itself and respond to Shi’s allegations”. The fact and truth is: Each and all allegations made by me were evidenced by Moog released exhibits on 23/12/20 way after the discovery process. The majority of most critical evidence of criminality and frauds are never in my possession. These include but not limited to exh. CX15,CX17,CX18,CX26,CX32,CX33,CX35,CX36,CX37,CX39CX40,
My case is an AIR21 case. Both Respondent and ALJ shy away from the only applicable precedence already established, misquoting many irrelevant cases. The Case of Bombardier, Inc. v. Mr. Sobhani where ALJ Morris was the judge himself who had ruled Bombarider, an extraterritorial air framer is under AIR21 jurisdiction and Mr. Sobhani, an extraterritorial employee worked for an extraterritorial air framer is protected under AIR21. Now my case concerns territorial Boeing and Respondent, a 100% American entity with non-disputable territorial jurisdiction , and I, who worked for that 100% U.S. territorial aviation entity for 10 years and my whistleblowing on the 100% US territorial aviation safety threat(evidenced by FAA, see CX10, CX11 and Reuters, The Crime Report press coverage) is not protected for lack of jurisdiction??? While both ALJ and Respondent spent their time excessively deliberating on AIR21 only focus on territorial or domestic matters, they just ignored the fact of my case’s territorial nature but spent no time to subject extraterritorial Bombardier under AIR21. IS THIS FAIR? No, this is too much a manifest injustice complicated with hostility and abuse of discretion.
Let the public of America, China and all over the world judge on such manifest injustice if necessary.
Critical fraud/criminal information was concealed by Moog
during ALJ trial that needs to be disclosed by ARB Order
The matter for which I lost my job and risked my life concerned a verified Chinese counterfeiter (See.CX21 ) criminally falsifying material certification and use of substandard non aerospace material for Moog contracted safety sensitive Boeing flight control systems. One of the parts is the single point of failure(SPOF) part for B737 spoiler single sourced to NHJ for 2 years compromising some 500 B737 planes now in service. The bigger scam has not been addressed by Moog, Boeing, FAA, OIG, or current press coverage in terms of the criminality and fraud. Moog concealed willfully critical information regarding the scam. A Motion for ARB Order on extraordinary ground compelling Respondent to disclose information is raised on 22/10/2017 via EFSR. The information includes but not limited to:
1. Copies of following lot number GMT material certificates
l GMT lot number SE0583B3–12
l GMT lot number SD1850B2–10G
l GMT lot number SB2881C2–11
l GMT lot number SC282A5–10G
2. Moog power point presentation of the raw material certification,dated September 7th,2016 mentioned in Exh E FAA report P.11
3. The Moog Supplier quality Engineer’s raw material Certificate of Conformance traceability summary audit report dated 02/09/2015”,
4. Any and all emails between August 7th 2015 till January 13th,2016 sent to or copied me by Mr Ron Rong, the SDE reporting to me. One email by Ron contained very critical information regarding a list of NHJ outsourcing 11 Moog part numbers. This email is particularly sought.
5. Any and all emails or writing communications between Moog and GMT clarifying material facts between August 8th,till December 30th, 2016
6. Ms Claire Starzak initial NHJ audit and approval checklist or any file she used to approve NHJ as Moog approved supplier initially.
I appeal ARB accept my Motion by ordering Moog to disclose above requested information because of the gravity, scope and extraordinariness of the matter which is an extreme public concern.It services fairly to Respondent that may clear their names,supporting their allegation “shi’s …based on wildly inappropriate charges of conspiracy, wrongdoing and fraud by (Moog Aircraft Group) the ALJ,the FAA”
In case ARB for whatever reasoning is not able to order and compel information disclosure to me, at least ARB should order Respondent submit requested information for ARB judges sight and judgment with particular attention to one GMT material certification containing heat lot GMT lot number SD1850B2–10G which according to GMT sales manager Mr. Sun it only sold to NHJ 112pcs, and it did not include any other material lot quantities (recording of Shi’s February 13,2017 conversation mentioned in OP Brief P.29)while(see CX17) NHJ was telling Moog 612pcs, and (SeeCX10)Moog fraudulently misinformed FAA of “a counting error”. This is scam or no scam matter concerning some 500 planes with counterfeit SPOF controlling plane take-off and landing. ARB should prudently consider my motion.
One of the capital reasons justice can not prevail is not having the truth and fact discovered or the head and feet of the body of truth and fact cut and then talk about “Totalities”. Reviewing and judging on severed documents,willfully ignoring unfairly precluded exhibits containing fact and truth could only result in miscarriage of justice.
1st wave of Press coverage, aviation experts and professionals view
vs “Libelous accusations”
It is a disgusting phenomenon that anybody or an organization, a whistleblower, or a press catching invincible Moog scam is libelous.
Victoria Mckenzie, a prominent journalist from reputable The Crime Report broke the story on the extraordinary air safety scam that to Moog must be libelous….based on Respondent decayed moral and ethical standard.
Crime Report investigation suggests that despite the sharp rebuke by the OIG earlier this year of FAA practices, attempts by a Chinese whistleblower to warn both authorities of a potential grave risk to the flying public continues to fall on deaf ears.
……Under the FAA’s own guidelines, when the agency finds evidence of “suspected unapproved parts” (SUPs), it is supposed to refer them to federal law enforcement agencies for a full examination.
But that didn’t happen.
The Moog case illustrates what some experts say is a worrying failure of oversight by the agency tasked with ensuring the safety of commercial airplanes in the U.S., as well as law enforcement agencies that investigate and prosecute unapproved parts fraud.
Reuters story 16/10/2017
Chinese suppliers to U.S. flight control systems maker Moog sold it poorly made parts, faked paperwork and outsourced work to a factory not approved by the company, according to an internal report by U.S. aviation regulators.
The FAA said it investigated safety concerns raised by a whistleblower, Charles Shi, and substantiated two of his allegations. One was addressed and closed, and the other “remains open until the corrective action is fully implemented by Boeing and verified by the FAA.” Boeing said Moog “had already assessed these two issues and taken all necessary corrective actions.” Moog said it “ The suspect parts, non of which are flight safety critical…” .
Moog supplies flight control systems for commercial and military planes — an industry where supply chain traceability and material quality are highly regulated and crucial for flight safety. NO, NO, NO, Reuters is libelous!!!
Moog is invincible but has nothing to do with safety because “Neither Moog…is …under the Act(Air21), Nor does Moog …perform safety-sensitive functions …for air carriers”see CX13. p. 4. Respondent is determined to keep counterfeits of SPOFs on Boeing planes, continue to defraud,conceal criminal acts….till the Day comes…
Well, Let the flying public hear more truth and fact, judge Moog attitude and interpretation of air safety, call Congress, call DOJ!!!
Apart from above truthful and factual reporting which must be “libelous” by Moog and FAA, below airlines response, aviation safety experts and professional opinions must also be unexceptionally “libelous” by the die-hard lie telling Respondent.
Thank you for contacting American Airlines. I want to assure you that your concerns have been documented for our department leaders to review.
Mr. Shi, again, thank you for reaching out to us regarding this important matter. We appreciate the information you provided.
Mary Schiavo, former Inspector General of the Department of Transportation,; under her leadership, 150 criminal convictions were recorded and over $47 million in restitution and fines were collected.
“Sadly, I’ve heard this many, many times,FAA says ‘Boeing looked at it, and they found it not to be a problem,’ and they pretty much rubber stamp [it].
“They don’t make Boeing go and inspect all the planes. And I suppose a lot of these are out in the hands of end-users now… FAA is loathe to actually refer people for criminal enforcement,”
Those, who attempt to sell SUPs, can sell their product for cheaper prices. Their alternatives appear to be the same, but there may be deficiencies in their wares which could be catastrophic.
Linkedin Aviation professionals
Nick Smit I can only emphasize that with airplanes and especially airliners NO counterfeit or non-OEM parts can ever be allowed as this will in the long run be of sub-standard quality and is likely to cause disastrous accidents.
Christopher Nadel If true I bet this will be like the vehicle emissions scandal, which will effect more companies and aircraft.
Roshni Purmessur If the issue of fake parts is not rumour and is real, then the Company supplying same should be sued and licence to operate revoked. How can human beings for the sake of money and profits, put peoples’ lives at stake and the environment as well.
Robert Burton The issue of “fake parts” is and has been around for quite some time. The issue itself could be solved relatively easily if the “Bottom line” people actually took this issue seriously and people where actually accountable. I have caught bogus parts and it is an uphill struggle with management before anything is done.
Posted by msbbarratt
I see no particular reason to doubt Charles Shi’s word….If so, this is the kind of thing that the entire industry + regulators ought to be moving as one to investigate, assess and act on appropriately, and fast.
However, it’s possible that for many it’s just too big an issue to contemplate — all those aircraft, all those parts, all those airlines and operators, etc. It’s potentially a problem way above almost everyone’s pay grade.
The reason to get on with it is, suppose that there is a widespread problem, and that accidents do start happening as a result. What then do we think the public’s reaction is going to be? “Aviation industry falls down on safety” would be the mildest of headlines…
An airline with a downed aircraft cannot hide behind a wall of paperwork to escape public opinion,
Should not this concern the good people seated at the pointy end of each AC? And the company hierarchy each flies for? But as for we the public, how would we ever know?
What went wrong to allow this? And why won’t the FAA act despite evidently having been given strong leads on the culprits? It’s a big call but I say follow the money.
Respondent tried but failed to obstruct justice, blocking truth and fact, deprive public of knowledge of the extraordinary air safety scandal which is no less than Kobe Steel, VW exhaust scandals. NO WAY!
For the foregoing reasons, Respondent opposition should be rejected and my appeal should be granted.
Dated: October 23,2017
Signed electronically by sending this paper via EFSR and emails.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on October 23th,2017, I electronically filed the Reply Brief via EFSR and send by email to the foregoing Reply Brief to Ms Donna M. Broome at Broome.Don@L.gov the paralegal specialist of DOL Administrative Judge Morris, and Respondent Moog counsel:
Jessica L. Copeland at jcops.com
No hard copy are mailed to Respondent as its counsel agreed in an email dated 18/10/2017.
//s// Chaosheng Charles Shi
Chaosheng Charles Shi