Looking at the picture below, if I were coming from the south (as per purple line), heading direct to HUGOD (per my clearance) and I was cleared for the RNAV 34 *legally* I'm expected to fly the hold, correct?  Of course, I would most likely, at this point, ask if I were 'cleared straight in'.  

I've notice on the chart that NoPT is required *only* if you are flying to HUGOD from either NOTAW or JOBED.  It seems that the IFD agrees with this as if you set the IAF as NOTAW or JOBED no hold is added but if you set up HUGOD as your IAF then a hold is added.  

Just wanted to confirm?

TIA!

One time I was flying GPS 12 into KVRB and being vectored, the IFD/AP started to sequence me into the hold which was not what ATC expected, once I got to the IAF I could not delete the hold. I had to change AP to heading mode, to reenter the procedure with VTF and fly to the FAF. Since then, I try to  delete the hold if not expecting to fly it before getting to the IAF/IF otherwise it will not you delete it.

You just have to be on your toes.  When I’m out practicing approaches, I’ll test this and if not cleared properly, will fly the PT.  It becomes a teaching moment for ATC.

There's absolutely no reason to fly a procedure turn from the intercept angle that you are showing. And I would NEVER try to "test" ATC by doing an unexpected procedure turn. That's going to turn you right into the face of the traffic behind you, which will not make you popular with the controller. It's a good way to get a pilot deviation and I would not want to argue about controller phraseology. 

The correct thing to do would be to respond "cleared for the straight in approach" when you receive the approach clearance, or otherwise clarify with ATC. A little communication goes a long way.

As others have said, the IFD box will automatically load the PT when you load the approach. It's up to you to delete it from the flight plan. That's easy to do.

Always pay attention to what the box is doing now (magenta line on the screen) and what it's going to do next (barber pole line). The PT is clearly shown when it's part of the flight plan. Get rid of it if it's not what you want to do.

AIM 5-4-6.e.4 says "If proceeding to an IAF with a published course reversal (procedure turn or hold-in-lieu of PT pattern), except when cleared for a straight in approach by ATC, the pilot must execute the procedure turn/hold-in-lieu of PT, and complete the approach."

AIM 5-4-6.e.6 says "When clearing aircraft direct to the IF, ATC will radar monitor the aircraft until the IF and will advise the pilot to expect clearance direct to the IF at least 5 miles from the fix. ATC must issue a straight-in approach clearance when clearing an aircraft direct to an IAF/IF with a procedure turn or hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn, and ATC does not want the aircraft to execute the course reversal."

So you are correct about the ATC phraseology. But I would still clarify with ATC and never do a PT in a case like this  unless everyone was expecting it. Yes, ATC can get loose sometimes. Still, they make fewer mistakes than I do. And a few seconds of extra communications will save a lot of time at an FAA hearing if things go wrong.

Interesting discussion. The following is from AIM 5-4-5-d-4 (Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP) Charts - Terminal Arrival Area) and appears specific to IAPs with TAAs:

With the TAA concept, it appears by definition that intercept IF/IAF intercept angles of less than or equal to 90 degrees will result in the aircraft being in a IAP published NoPT sector of the TAA and thus on a NoPT routing. This appears to satisfy condition five below from AIM 5-4-6-e (Approach Clearance). 

I believe that since this particular example IAP had an MSA; not TAA, the cited AIM references above do not apply. In this example, I think the controller technically needs to issue a "straight-in" approach clearance if no HILPT is expected and the aircraft is not following a published NoPT route per AIM 5-4-6-e (Approach Clearance) conditions four and/or six below. 

I suspect that if this procedure was newly charted today, it would be as a TAA which would show NoPT from whole quadrants or, depending on terrain, at least from blocks of headings. Bear in mind that there may be procedures such as this where you would need to lose altitude in the hold, although probably not in this case.

Rolfe

With that in mind I have responded to the "cleared for the approach" with something like cleared straight in no PT. 

One other reason to use a PT or a hold is to loose altitude to be at a proper position to continue the approach from that point inbound. 

I believe Rolfe has the best read on this particular approach.

As previously stated, when in doubt, ask ATC.

In the reverse scenario, I had a straight in sector clearly marked “NoPT” direct to the IF/IAF.  I did not know to delete the HILPT and the autopilot followed as instructed. ATC called me and asked my intentions and if I was breaking off the approach.  After a moment of spacial confusion, confessed, corrected, and proceded down the path to the FIF.

Best advice, have the IFD’s FMS page up and know what it is thinking/planning.  Correct it when necessary.  And most definitely, know the mode that the IFD is in; GPS, GPS->LPV, LPV, etc. and know how to make the correct mode active, if it does not arm automatically.  These actions are user setting dependent.