FAA Inspector Sues United

7

737steve

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 26, 2025
Messages
116
Display Name
Steve
Asmus noticed that the seatback pocket at his assigned seat was torn, which he says impaired access to the emergency briefing card and constituted a potential safety violation. He also photographed a passenger standing in the aisle during pushback, an action prohibited under FAA rules. Although he was traveling off duty, Asmus says his role as a safety inspector obligated him to report the issues.
Asmus alleges that cabin crew accused him of photographing them and behaving combatively, claims he denies. He says the flight crew demanded to see the photos and warned the aircraft would return to the gate if he did not comply. Although Asmus showed that no crew members had been photographed, the aircraft returned to the gate and he was removed from the flight.
The FAA subsequently initiated a civil penalty enforcement action against Asmus. However, in June 2025, a Department of Transportation administrative law judge dismissed the case, finding United’s witnesses unreliable. The FAA declined to appeal, making the ruling final.

Wow. Off duty, he caused a ruckus over a torn seatback pocket. I have a hunch there was more things he did and more words spoken that is being mentioned here. Maybe he skipped the FAA inspector class that covered "Follow the flight attendant instructions, and don't be "that guy" ".
 
WDD said:
Wow. Off duty, he caused a ruckus over a torn seatback pocket. I have a hunch there was more things he did and more words spoken that is being mentioned here.
Click to expand...

And what about the part where he witnessed a passenger out of their seat on pushback? He took a picture and the cabin crew was upset.

He also photographed a passenger standing in the aisle during pushback, an action prohibited under FAA rules. Although he was traveling off duty, Asmus says his role as a safety inspector obligated him to report the issues.

Let's just assume for a moment that the plane came to an abrupt halt and the passenger was slung against a seat and the floor requiring a return to gate and medical evacuation. After the FAA investigates they find out this off duty inspector was there and witnessed it but said nothing. What would be the outcome?

WDD said:
Maybe he skipped the FAA inspector class that covered "Follow the flight attendant instructions, and don't be "that guy" ".
Click to expand...

Which class would that had been?

He says the flight crew demanded to see the photos and warned the aircraft would return to the gate if he did not comply. Although Asmus showed that no crew members had been photographed, the aircraft returned to the gate and he was removed from the flight.

The cabin crewed know they screwed up and decided to flip it on the ASI. He was removed and left, so they felt they had succeeded.

Following the incident, Asmus claims United portrayed him as a disruptive passenger motivated by personal gain rather than a regulator acting in the interest of safety. The airline allegedly imposed a lifetime travel ban, demanded $3,153 in restitution for the gate return, and filed a formal complaint with the Federal Aviation Administration.

Seems like retribution. As always there is more to the story.

The complaint further alleges that United was aware Asmus was actively involved in oversight of its Boeing 737 Max fleet and sought to have him removed from that role. After the airline’s complaint, Asmus was taken off United-related oversight duties, including an ongoing investigation into the carrier’s 737 Max operations.

And there you go. And of course there is much more to that story.

The FAA subsequently initiated a civil penalty enforcement action against Asmus.

Yep, depending upon FAA management and how cozy they were with UAL management this is not uncommon. Get rid of the guy that we don't like for doing his job.

However, in June 2025, a Department of Transportation administrative law judge dismissed the case, finding United’s witnesses unreliable. The FAA declined to appeal, making the ruling final.

That says it all right there.

In its decision, the court warned that penalizing passengers for reporting safety concerns would create a chilling effect on aviation safety, stating that such actions could discourage reporting and endanger lives.

And in ASI Asmus case, he does recognize safety concerns as that is what he was trained to do.

Despite the ruling, United has refused to lift Asmus’s travel ban. He is now seeking $12.75 million in damages, including $10 million in punitive damages, $2.5 million in general damages, and $250,000 in special economic damages, and has requested a jury trial.

Out of court settlement coming.
 
This is not his first lawsuit of this type. Some might think that he's looking for a payout.

Passengers stand up during pushback all the time. Pushback with passengers standing used to be normal procedure at Southwest.
These days,they know they're required to remain seated, but rules are for other people.
The plane can't be stopped fast enough to injure anyone, but I've had the tug driver bring us to a stop many times to wait for some doofus to get back in his seat.

Removing a passenger after pushback is a big deal. Lots of paperwork. Schedule delay. Just a mess.
I suspect that the flight attendants' side of the event will never make it to the news.
 
Doc Holliday said:
The complaint further alleges that United was aware Asmus was actively involved in oversight of its Boeing 737 Max fleet and sought to have him removed from that role. After the airline’s complaint, Asmus was taken off United-related oversight duties, including an ongoing investigation into the carrier’s 737 Max operations.
Click to expand...
The complaint goes into more detail on this. Seems like at the time, this guy was a real thorn in United's side. And this incident apparently made it higher up in United management than you'd expect for a typical misbehaving passenger issue.
 
Lindberg said:
The complaint goes into more detail on this. Seems like at the time, this guy was a real thorn in United's side. And this incident apparently made it higher up in United management than you'd expect for a typical misbehaving passenger issue.
Click to expand...

Yea, I figured as much. And it happens fairly frequently.

I believe UAL screwed the pooch by taking the route they did.

I still suspect an out of court settlement.
 
Yeah….. a torn seat back pocket - has caused many a plane to crash.

And flight attendants have to deal with people out of their seats - it happens. They deal with it.

How he created a problem out of all of that to the extent that the plane had to return to the gate is the video I’d like to see.

He’s after 25 million. This should be entertaining.
 
I'm retired and no longer have access to the 737 Minimum Equipment List (MEL). Here's my guess as to how it might have played out to keep the all the papers in order.

Not going back to the gate for a torn seat back pocket, but it has to be deferred in the logbook prior to departure. Pull over, somewhere on the way out, call Dispatch and get a 3-way call with Maintenance.
Write it up in the logbook and fill out an MEL sticker. This would probably be under "Non-Essential Equipment and Furnishings".
Amend the flight release to include the deferred maintenance item. Time and initials please.
Make sure we haven't burned down fuel to less than minimum takeoff for the flight. Yes, the engines have been running all this time. (Think about that when your Honda shuts off at a stop sign.)
Get back in line and figure out how much time we have to make up to not be late according to the D.O.T.

The captain may be the final authority, but you better be able to justify your actions if questioned. Common sense does not always apply.
 
737steve said:
I'm retired and no longer have access to the 737 Minimum Equipment List (MEL). Here's my guess as to how it might have played out to keep the all the papers in order.

Not going back to the gate for a torn seat back pocket, but it has to be deferred in the logbook prior to departure. Pull over, somewhere on the way out, call Dispatch and get a 3-way call with Maintenance.
Write it up in the logbook and fill out an MEL sticker. This would probably be under "Non-Essential Equipment and Furnishings".
Amend the flight release to include the deferred maintenance item. Time and initials please.
Make sure we haven't burned down fuel to less than minimum takeoff for the flight. Yes, the engines have been running all this time. (Think about that when your Honda shuts off at a stop sign.)
Get back in line and figure out how much time we have to make up to not be late according to the D.O.T.

The captain may be the final authority, but you better be able to justify your actions if questioned. Common sense does not always apply.
Click to expand...

The ASI could have written it up as an improper preflight by the cabin crew. Just an assumption.

The standing passenger was the real problem. Since we don’t have the full story could it be that the cabin crew was doing nothing to sit the passenger down? Perhaps. Could it also be that other cabin problems were noted? Dunno.
 
737steve said:
Passengers stand up during pushback all the time. Pushback with passengers standing used to be normal procedure at Southwest.
These days,they know they're required to remain seated, but rules are for other people.
The plane can't be stopped fast enough to injure anyone, but I've had the tug driver bring us to a stop many times to wait for some doofus to get back in his seat.
Click to expand...
I flew with some of the Pilots whose Southwest flights this happened on. Herb's thinking was that if it was ok to stand on a bus or train it was ok to stand on a taxing airplane/ The pilots were fined by the FAA but Southwest paid the fine. It finally stopped when the FAA threatened to pull Southwest's Operating Certificate.
 
jayhawk74 said:
I flew with some of the Pilots whose Southwest flights this happened on. Herb's thinking was that if it was ok to stand on a bus or train it was ok to stand on a taxing airplane/ The pilots were fined by the FAA but Southwest paid the fine. It finally stopped when the FAA threatened to pull Southwest's Operating Certificate.
Click to expand...

It doesn't work like that. When I was in the Navy stories like that started with "This is no sh t!"
 
737steve said:
I'm retired and no longer have access to the 737 Minimum Equipment List (MEL). Here's my guess as to how it might have played out to keep the all the papers in order.

Not going back to the gate for a torn seat back pocket, but it has to be deferred in the logbook prior to departure. Pull over, somewhere on the way out, call Dispatch and get a 3-way call with Maintenance.
Write it up in the logbook and fill out an MEL sticker. This would probably be under "Non-Essential Equipment and Furnishings".
Amend the flight release to include the deferred maintenance item. Time and initials please.
Make sure we haven't burned down fuel to less than minimum takeoff for the flight. Yes, the engines have been running all this time. (Think about that when your Honda shuts off at a stop sign.)
Get back in line and figure out how much time we have to make up to not be late according to the D.O.T.

The captain may be the final authority, but you better be able to justify your actions if questioned. Common sense does not always apply.
Click to expand...
There is a caveat: typically it must be secured in place in order to defer it and kick out of town. Most times I've had to resecure a seat back pocket the metal support rod got damaged, popped out of it's hole, and sticking where a passenger "could be hurt by getting cut by the sharp metal". If nothing is actually sticking out then you can probably do that. I always made sure I had tie wraps in my tool bag when I went out on gate calls. Most crews I know wouldn't even bother reporting a damaged seat back pocket after pushback until they got where they were going. Then again in the good old days the way to handle a complaining passenger was to give them their choice of what's in the bar cart after takeoff;) .
 
Guess they need to install an emergency stop button at every Jumpseat…not that flight attendants can see the whole cabin when seated…Glad my wife is retired last month from UA…don’t get me started on the quality of some FAA safety guys in my opinion…FYI in my experience he would need thier permission to sue…try to get one to a deposition…lol
 
If you were on the jury, knowing only what is reported here. What would you vote? My answer: I find for the plaintiff inspector, and award him ONE US DOLLAR for his outrage. Treble it, and make UA write him a check. Anyone recall the USFL lawsuit?
 
Doc Holliday said:
It doesn't work like that. When I was in the Navy stories like that started with "This is no sh t!"
Click to expand...
So are you saying that the FAA didn't fine the pilots or that Southwest didn't reimburse the pilots for the fine.
 
jayhawk74 said:
So are you saying that the FAA didn't fine the pilots or that Southwest didn't reimburse the pilots for the fine.
Click to expand...

The FAA doesn't write tickets and charge fines. The process doesn't work that way.

If a problem is found then an investigation is launched, this starts with a Letter of Investigation. If cause is found for an enforcement (this is back before the compliance philosophy took effect) then the investigating Inspector must write an enforcement using the Order 2150.3. This enforcement is reviewed by the office (which in this case would be the SWA Certificate Management Office) and submitted to FAA Region Legal. There the lawyers will process the enforcement and using a table in the guidance determine the action needed once they determine an actual violation took place. During this time the airman will be interviewed by a FAA Lawyer with the Inspector who wrote the enforcement. Once this is all done the airman gets a letter stating the disposition of the investigation and what was determined. On something like this it wouldn't be a fine but a suspension of privileges for 15 to 30 days. (In fairness we would have to find a historic copy of the 2150.3 to find what would be the actual penalty would be. Monetary fines wouldn't come into play unless the violation was more serious than being discussed).

The airman would then have had the right to appeal the violation to the ALJ at the NTSB. By the way, this process takes months to play out.

The problem with your story is there would be no fine to pay, the airman would probably suffer a suspension of privileges that remains on his record and could have a damaging effect if he got additional violations.

So the pilots "taking one for the team" with regards to an enforcement is a hangar tale, or as we in the Navy called it a "Sea Story".
 
My mechanic and Margy were flying out to Nebraska years ago to ferry the Navion back from restoration. The mechanic tells the flight attendent on the little regional turboprop:

Bobby: Where's your airworthiness certificate?
FA: What?
Bobby: BZZT. You just failed your FAA inspection.
FA: [stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding ... it's right over here (pointing at the framed certificate).

later in the flight...
FA: You had me going about that FAA inspector thing.
Bobby: [pulls out her mechanic's certificate showing her Inspection Authorization] No, really I am one.
FA: [Stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding. I'm not with the FAA.
 
flyingron said:
My mechanic and Margy were flying out to Nebraska years ago to ferry the Navion back from restoration. The mechanic tells the flight attendent on the little regional turboprop:

Bobby: Where's your airworthiness certificate?
FA: What?
Bobby: BZZT. You just failed your FAA inspection.
FA: [stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding ... it's right over here (pointing at the framed certificate).

later in the flight...
FA: You had me going about that FAA inspector thing.
Bobby: [pulls out her mechanic's certificate showing her Inspection Authorization] No, really I am one.
FA: [Stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding. I'm not with the FAA.
Click to expand...

How NOT to hit on an FA 101.
 
This lawsuit is new, related to events 4 years ago. Is there no Statute of Limitations on torts?
 
The guy seems to be litigious. A search shows he has filed three federal lawsuits: One against Pegasus Aviation, one against Spencer Trucking, and the mentioned United One.

The Pegasus one was when he was working for them as a mechanic on their contract with KLM alleging he was kicked off that contract over a dispute with the KLM mainenance manager. Seems that one was settled and withdrawn. The Trucking company one alledges that the truck hit him and ran him off the road. That one also was withdrawn. Of course, this happens all the time, we'll not know what sort of settlement may have happened.

Here's the current complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.463527/gov.uscourts.cand.463527.1.0.pdf

The limitations period issue is complex, but Asmus argues that there was tolling here that didn't start the clock until the adminsitrative proceedings against him at the FAA concluded (last July).
 
I had heard a rumor concerning the incident. It was only a rumor, but if what I heard bore any resemblance to reality, there was indeed much more to the story (as others have suggested). Did I mention that it was only a rumor?

flyingron said:
My mechanic and Margy were flying out to Nebraska years ago to ferry the Navion back from restoration. The mechanic tells the flight attendent on the little regional turboprop:

Bobby: Where's your airworthiness certificate?
FA: What?
Bobby: BZZT. You just failed your FAA inspection.
FA: [stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding ... it's right over here (pointing at the framed certificate).

later in the flight...
FA: You had me going about that FAA inspector thing.
Bobby: [pulls out her mechanic's certificate showing her Inspection Authorization] No, really I am one.
FA: [Stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding. I'm not with the FAA.
Click to expand...
Captain: Bobby, there's a Hertz counter right here at the airport, and they have a very special car standing by for customers who harass my crew...

Takeaway: Whether you're a passenger, a crewmember, or an FAA inspector, don't be a jerk.
 
flyingron said:
My mechanic and Margy were flying out to Nebraska years ago to ferry the Navion back from restoration. The mechanic tells the flight attendent on the little regional turboprop:

Bobby: Where's your airworthiness certificate?
FA: What?
Bobby: BZZT. You just failed your FAA inspection.
FA: [stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding ... it's right over here (pointing at the framed certificate).

later in the flight...
FA: You had me going about that FAA inspector thing.
Bobby: [pulls out her mechanic's certificate showing her Inspection Authorization] No, really I am one.
FA: [Stammers]
Bobby: Just kidding. I'm not with the FAA.
Click to expand...
Bobby sounds like a real jerk.
 
there’s way more to this than what’s in the story.
Someone (or someone’s) copped an attitude, I’d guess. And things escalated.

*IF* the report is correct, the FAA inspector was inappropriately treated (a FA can’t demand to see photos on someone’s phone- that they don’t like, and certainly can’t use deplaning as a threat- that’s a lot more than “just a torn seat pocket”)

Of course, it’s entirely possible that the inspector is a litigious ass.

Without more info and context, it’s beyond my capacity to adjudicate right/wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top