## Facts

- Don R. Ickes operated a private airfield and recreational park in Osterburg, Pennsylvania, and flew a two-seat “Challenger II” from the property.
- Ickes asserted the Challenger II was an “ultralight vehicle” exempt from aircraft registration, airworthiness certification, and pilot-qualification requirements.
- Under FAA regulations, an ultralight is narrowly defined, including that it is intended for operation by a single occupant and, if powered, must meet strict limits on weight, fuel capacity, and speed.
- The FAA repeatedly cited Ickes for operating the Challenger II as an unregistered aircraft and for other operational violations; the record reflected repeated unsafe or hazardous flight activity and noncompliance with pilot-credential requirements.
- Ickes advertised a weekend air show featuring “fly-by demonstrations” on his property.
- On June 28, 2001, the day before the scheduled event, the FAA issued an Emergency Cease and Desist Order to prevent operation of aircraft during the event and to bring Ickes and the Challenger II into regulatory compliance.
- Ickes petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit for review, challenging both the FAA’s classification of the Challenger II and the agency’s use of emergency authority.

## Issues

1. Whether the FAA lawfully treated Ickes’s two-seat Challenger II as an “aircraft” subject to federal registration, certification, and pilot-qualification rules rather than as an exempt “ultralight vehicle.”
2. Whether the FAA abused its discretion or exceeded statutory authority by issuing an emergency cease-and-desist order based on an exigent danger arising from Ickes’s planned air show and prior noncompliance.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit denied the petition for review and affirmed the FAA’s Emergency Cease and Desist Order.
- The court held the FAA did not err in regulating the Challenger II as an aircraft rather than an ultralight.
- The court held the FAA had an adequate basis to determine the planned air show posed an exigent danger warranting immediate emergency action.

## Legal Principles

- The ultralight exemption is limited to vehicles meeting the specific regulatory definition; vehicles outside that definition may be regulated as aircraft.
- Aircraft are subject to federal registration and operational safety requirements, including certification and pilot-qualification rules.
- The FAA may issue emergency orders with immediate effect when necessary to address an exigent danger to safety, and reviewing courts generally defer to the agency’s safety-based determinations when supported by the record.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the FAA’s immediate cease-and-desist order, concluding that the Challenger II did not qualify for the ultralight exemption and that the FAA reasonably treated Ickes’s planned public flight demonstrations—given his history of violations—as an exigent safety risk justifying emergency action.


Ickes v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 299 F.3d 260 (3d Cir. 2002)