Jay Briley v. Commissioner of IRS

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 31182-09 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999704501]. Mailed to: Jay Briley. [15-1461]

Appeal: 15-1461

Doc: 24

Filed: 11/23/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1461

JAY BONANZA BRILEY; CONSTANCE H. BRILEY,
Petitioners - Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court.
(Tax Ct. No. 31182-09)

Submitted:

November 19, 2015

Decided:

November 23, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jay Bonanza Briley, Constance H. Briley, Appellants Pro Se.
Bruce R. Ellisen, John A. Nolet, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1461

Doc: 24

Filed: 11/23/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jay Bonanza Briley and Constance H. Briley appeal from the
tax

court’s

orders

upholding

the

Commissioner’s

deficiency

determination as to their 2004 and 2005 income tax liabilities
and assessment of penalties, and denying their motion to vacate
that order.

On appeal, the Commissioner asserts that the tax

court lacked jurisdiction due to the Brileys’ late filing of
their petition for redetermination.
court

petition

§ 6213(a)

is

(2012).

a

jurisdictional
The

Brileys’

petition was December 22, 2009.
December

23,

The timely filing of a tax

2009.

See

26

prerequisite.
deadline

for

26

U.S.C.

filing

their

Their petition was postmarked
U.S.C.

petition filed when properly mailed).

§

7502

(2012)

(deeming

Because the petition was

not timely filed, the tax court lacked jurisdiction to address
the Brileys’ petition.

See 26 U.S.C. § 6213(a) (“The Tax Court

shall have no jurisdiction to enjoin any action or proceeding or
order any refund under this subsection unless a timely petition
for a redetermination of the deficiency has been filed.”).
Accordingly, we vacate the tax court’s orders and remand
this case to the tax court with instructions to dismiss the
petition

for

lack

of

jurisdiction.

We

dispense

with

oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

2

Appeal: 15-1461

Doc: 24

Filed: 11/23/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED

3