United States of America v. Rodriguez
Filing
8
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS re I.R.S. Summons Enforcement signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 6/3/2014. Objections due within fourteen (14) days of service.(Martinez, A)
1 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
2 YOSHINORI H. T. HIMEL #66194
Assistant United States Attorney
3 Eastern District of California
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
4 Sacramento, CA 95814-2322
Telephone: (916) 554-2760
5 Facsimile: (916) 554-2900
email: yoshinori.himel@usdoj.gov
6
Attorneys for Petitioner United States of America
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
1:14-cv-00326-LJO-GSA
13
Petitioner,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT
14
v.
15
RICHARD RODRIGUEZ,
16
Respondent.
Taxpayer:
RICHARD RODRIGUEZ
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
This matter came before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on May 9, 2014, under the
Order to Show Cause filed March 10, 2014. The Order to Show Cause, with the Verified
Petition to Enforce I.R.S. Summons filed March 6, 2014 and its supporting memorandum, was
personally served upon the respondent, Richard Rodriguez, on March 18, 2014. Respondent did
not file a written opposition or a notice of non-opposition to the verified petition as provided for
in the Order to Show Cause. Yoshinori H. T. Himel, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared
on behalf of Petitioner, and investigating Revenue Officer Lorena Ramos was also present.
Respondent did not appear at the scheduled hearing.
28
Findings and Recommendations Re: I.R.S. Summons
Enforcement; Order
1
The Verified Petition to Enforce IRS Summons initiating this proceeding seeks to enforce
1
2 an administrative summons (Exhibit A to the petition) issued May 28, 2013. The summons is
3 part of an investigation of the respondent to secure information needed to collect Form 1040
4 assessed federal income taxes for the tax year ending December 31, 2007, and civil penalties for
5 the quarterly tax periods ending June 30, 2008, September 30, 2008, December 31, 2008, March
6 31, 2009, June 30, 2009, September 30, 2009, December 31, 2009, March 31, 2010, June 30,
7 2010, September 30, 2010, December 31, 2010, March 31, 2011, June 30, 2011, and September
8 30, 2011.
Subject matter jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1340 and 1345, and is found to
9
10 be proper. I.R.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a) (26 U.S.C.) authorize the government to bring the
11 action. The Order to Show Cause shifted to respondent the burden of rebutting any of the four
12 requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).
The Court has reviewed the petition and supporting documents. Based on the
13
14 uncontroverted verified petition by Revenue Officer Lorena Ramos and the entire record, the
15 Court makes the following findings:
(1) The summons issued by Revenue Officer Lorena Ramos on May 28, 2013, and served
16
17 upon respondent, Richard Rodriguez, on May 28, 2013, seeking testimony and production of
18 documents and records in respondent’s possession, was issued in good faith and for a legitimate
19 purpose under I.R.C. § 7602, that is, to secure information needed to collect Form 1040 assessed
20 federal income taxes for the tax year ending December 31, 2007, and civil penalties for the
21 quarterly tax periods ending June 30, 2008, September 30, 2008, December 31, 2008, March 31,
22 2009, June 30, 2009, September 30, 2009, December 31, 2009, March 31, 2010, June 30, 2010,
23 September 30, 2010, December 31, 2010, March 31, 2011, June 30, 2011, and September 30,
24 2011.
25
(2) The information sought is relevant to that purpose.
26
(3) The information sought is not already in the possession of the Internal Revenue
27 Service.
28
(4) The administrative steps required by the Internal Revenue Code have been followed.
Findings and Recommendations Re: I.R.S. Summons
Enforcement; Order
2
1
(5) There is no evidence of referral of this case by the Internal Revenue Service to the
2 Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
3
(6) The verified petition and its exhibits made a prima facie showing in satisfaction of the
4 requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).
5
(7) The burden shifted to respondent, Richard Rodriguez, to rebut that prima facie
6 showing.
7
(8) Respondent presented no argument or evidence to rebut the prima facie showing.
8
The Court therefore recommends that the IRS summons served upon Respondent,
9 Richard Rodriguez, be enforced, and that Respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S. offices
10 at 2525 Capitol Street, Suite 206, Fresno, California, before Revenue Officer Lorena Ramos or
11 her designated representative, on the twenty-first (21st) day after the filing date of the District
12 Judge’s summons enforcement order, or at a later date to be set in writing by Revenue Officer
13 Ramos, then and there to be sworn, to give testimony, and to produce for examining and
14 copying the books, checks, records, papers and other data demanded by the summons, the
15 examination to continue from day to day until completed. It is further recommended that if it
16 enforces the summons, the District Court should retain jurisdiction to enforce its order by means
17 of its contempt power.
18
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
19 assigned to this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 304 of the Local
20 Rules of this Court. Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and
21 recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all
22 parties. Such a document should be titled "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and
23 Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten (10) days
24 after service of the objections. The District Judge will then review these findings and
25 recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The parties are advised that failure to file
26 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order.
27 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
28
Findings and Recommendations Re: I.R.S. Summons
Enforcement; Order
3
1
THE CLERK SHALL SERVE this and further orders by mail to Richard Rodriguez,
2 7233 W. Browning, Fresno, California 93723.
3
4 IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
Dated:
June 3, 2014
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Findings and Recommendations Re: I.R.S. Summons
Enforcement; Order
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?