February 8, 2006

In the Matter of the Complaint Against

AMIR GHADAMI

d/b/a

CAR LEASE AND SALES

and/or

C.L.A.S.

at

P.O. Box 33973

Granada Hills, CA 91394-3973

P.S. Docket No. FR 05-117

APPEARANCE FOR COMPLAINANT:

Catherine Green, Esq.

Office of the General Counsel

United States Postal Service

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:

Amir Ghadami

POSTAL SERVICE DECISION

Respondent, Amir Ghadami, has requested modification or revocation of the September 6, 2005 order finding him in default. Complainant opposes Respondent’s request.

The Complaint in this proceeding was filed with the Recorder on June 17, 2005, by the General Counsel (Complainant). The Complaint, together with the Notice of Answer and Hearing, was served on Respondent on July 28, 2005, thus establishing August 12, 2005, as the date by which his Answer was to be filed. As Respondent did not file an Answer to the Complaint within the time allowed or as of September 6, 2005, an order finding him in default was issued on that date. However, because Respondent’s request for modification or revocation indicated that he had terminated his business and closed his post office box, the Judicial Officer issued an Order on December 13, 2005, suggesting that it might be appropriate for the parties to discuss substituting a consent agreement for the default order. During a telephone conference with the parties on January 18, 2006, Complainant advised that previous attempts to arrive at a mutually satisfactory consent agreement had been unsuccessful, but agreed to further pursue the possibility with Respondent. Respondent was advised that if a signed consent agreement was not filed with the Judicial Officer by February 3, 2006, the request for modification or revocation would be denied because he had not shown that the default order was improperly issued or that modification or revocation was otherwise appropriate.[1]

A signed consent agreement has not been filed with the Judicial Officer within the time allowed. Accordingly, Respondent’s request for modification or revocation of the September 6, 2005 default order is denied, and False Representation Order No. 05-23 and Cease and Desist Order No. CD-4489 remain in full force and effect.

David I. Brochstein

Acting Judicial Officer

---

[1] See Western Vitamins and Health Products, Inc., P.S. Docket No. FR 30/121 (P.S.D. Aug. 8, 1991) (holding that party seeking modification or revocation has burden to show that scheme resulting in default order has been discontinued, there is no possibility of recurrent false representations and there is no risk of future harm to public); Judy Harris Pearson, P.S. Docket No. FR 34/73 (P.S.D. Jan. 18, 1991) (holding that false representation orders will not be modified or revoked absent a showing that the orders have served their purpose, or that an agreement by the parties obviates the need for the orders).