intentionally providing false information on an application form. Ill We conclude that it was arbitrary and capricious to deny Singleton a hearing at which he could offer evidence that he did not understand the phrase “administrative action” to include a court-ordered revocation of his driver’s license. Accordingly, we grant the petition for review, vacate the NTSB’s summary judgment order, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. So ordered. 1 . Although Hart itself interpreted a regulation related to fraudulent or intentionally false entries in logbooks, the FAA and the Board adopted its requirements for purposes of § 67.403(a)(1) as well. See Dillmon, op. at 1093. 2 . See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Board Opinion at 6 (noting that the NTSB has
holding that dispute regarding material fact is genuine if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if there is a genuine dispute about a material fact holding that under the federal rules of civil procedure summary judgment will not lie if the dispute about a material fact is genuine that is if the evidence is such that a reasonable factfinder could return a verdict for the nonmoving party holding that an issue is genuine if the evidence is sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the nonmoving party holding that summary judgment is unwarranted if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party