Federal Communications Commission DA 08-143
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Family Car Service, Inc.
Brooklyn, NY
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No.  EB-05-NY-353
NAL/Acct. No. 200732380003
FRN.  0014 5183 69
ORDER
Adopted:  January 22, 2008 Released:  January 24, 2008
By the Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1. In this Order (“Order”), we cancel a proposed forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand 
dollars ($10,000) issued to Family Car Service, Inc. (“Family Car Service”) for apparent willful and 
repeated violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"),1 by operating 
radio transmission equipment on the frequencies 30.94 MHz and 30.98 MHz without a license in Brooklyn, 
NY. 
2. On December 21, 2006, the Commission’s New York Field Office issued a Notice of 
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (“NAL”) in the amount of $10,000 to Family Car Service for 
unauthorized radio transmissions from a taxicab service operated at 262 4th Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11215.  
A response to the NAL was submitted by Lillian Rodriguez on January 22, 2007.
II. DISCUSSION 
3. We agree with Ms. Rodriguez that the NAL should be cancelled because the NAL was issued 
to a non-existent entity.  Although Ms. Rodriguez admits that she owns the taxicab service at issue in the 
NAL, she explains that she operates the business as a sole proprietor under the name “Family Car 
Service.” Ms. Rodriguez states that Family Car Service is not an incorporated entity and provides 
supporting documentation.  Accordingly, we conclude that the NAL was not issued to the proper subject 
and must be cancelled.
  
1 47 U.S.C. § 301.  
Federal Communications Commission DA 08-143
2
4. We note, however, that in her response to the NAL, Ms. Rodriguez admits that her taxicab 
service operated without authorization on the frequencies and dates identified in the NAL.  Ms. Rodriguez 
claims that she was not aware that she needed an FCC license to operate the radio equipment.  While Ms. 
Rodriguez subsequently was granted a license on January 19, 2006, to operate on the subject frequencies 
at her taxicab service in Brooklyn, New York, we remind Ms. Rodriguez that prior knowledge of the law 
is not necessary in determining whether a violation existed.2 As a licensee, Ms. Rodriguez will be held 
responsible for any future violations of the Commission’s rules.
III. ORDERING CLAUSES
5. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended,3 and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the Rules,4 the Notice of Apparent 
Liability for Forfeiture issued to Family Car Service, Inc. is HEREBY CANCELLED.
6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by Certified Mail, 
Return Receipt Requested, and regular mail, to Lillian Rodriguez at her address of record and to counsel 
for Lillian Rodriguez at his address of record.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
G. Michael Moffitt
Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region
Enforcement Bureau
  
2 See, e.g. Profit Enterprises, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 8 FCC Rcd 2846, 2846 (1993) (denying the mitigation claim of 
a manufacturer/distributor who thought that the equipment certification and marketing requirements were 
inapplicable, stating that its “prior knowledge or understanding of the law is unnecessary to a determination of 
whether a violation existed ... ignorance of the law is [not] a mitigating factor.”).
3 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
4 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).