Ernestine C. Miranda v. Office of Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

Filing 6

ORDER Directing TIGTA to File, No Later Than February 27, 2015, a Response to Plaintiff's Pending Motion Pursuant to the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 re 1 signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/26/2015. (Martinez, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

ERNESTINE CHRISTINA MIRANDA,

13

Movant,

14
15
16

v.
OFFICE OF THE TREASURY
INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX
ADMINISTRATION,

17

14-mc-00059 GSA
ORDER DIRECTING TIGTA TO FILE,
NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 27, 2015, A
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S PENDING
MOTION PURSUANT TO THE RIGHT TO
FINANCIAL PRIVACY ACT OF 1978
(Doc. 1)

Respondent.

18
19

On August 28, 2014, the movant, Ernestine Christina Miranda (“Movant”), filed a Motion

20

for an Order Pursuant to the Customer Challenge Provisions of the Right to Financial Privacy Act

21

of 1978 (“RFPA”), 12 U.S.C. § 3401 et seq. (Doc. 1). Specifically, Plaintiff seeks an order

22

preventing the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (“TIGTA”) from obtaining

23
access, via subpoena, to her financial records held by Wells Fargo Bank.
24
The RFPA permits challenges to government subpoenas by customers of financial

25
26

institutions. 1 See 12 U.S.C. § 3410(a). Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 3410(a), a customer of a

27
1

28

Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 3401(5), “ „customer‟ means any person or authorized representative of that person who
utilized or is utilizing any service of a financial institution, or for whom a financial institution is acting or has acted as

1

1

financial institution “may file a motion to quash an administrative summons or judicial subpena,

2

or an application to enjoin a Government authority from obtaining financial records pursuant to a

3

formal written request,” within “ten days of service or within fourteen days of mailing” of said

4

summons or subpoena, with “copies served upon the Government authority.” (Emphasis added).

5
6

The Court has attempted to ascertain the timeliness of Plaintiff‟s motion and has obtained

7

further documentation from Plaintiff in this regard.2 However, upon review of all the

8

documentation provided by Plaintiff, the Court is unable to ascertain when the subpoena at issue

9

was served on Plaintiff or when it was mailed to Plaintiff. See 12 U.S.C. § 3410(a). Therefore

10
11
12
13
14

the Court cannot determine whether Plaintiff has complied with the procedural requirements
outlined in 12 U.S.C. § 3410(a). See S.E.C. v. Jerry T. O’Brein, Inc., 467 U.S. 735, 745 (1984)
(“a consumer‟s ability to challenge a subpoena is cabined by strict procedural requirements”).
Accordingly, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 3410 (b), the Court orders the respondent, TIGTA,

15

to file a sworn response to the movant‟s motion no later than February 27, 2015. The response

16

shall include a declaration or other proof identifying when TIGTA‟s Subpoena Duces Tecum was

17

mailed or served on the movant, so the Court can assess the timeliness of the movant‟s filing. See

18

12 U.S.C. § 3410(a) (“a customer of a financial institution “may file a motion to quash an

19

administrative summons or judicial subpoena” within “ten days of service or within fourteen days

20
21
22

of mailing” of said summons or subpoena) (emphasis added).
TIGTA has not yet appeared in this action. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed

23

to serve the government with a copy of this order, as well as the orders previously docketed as

24

Doc. Nos. 2 and 4, at the following addresses: (1) Treasury Inspector General of Tax

25
26
27
28

a fiduciary, in relation to an account maintained in the person's name[.]” 12 U.S.C. § 3401(5).
2
On September 5, 2014, this Court ordered Movant to file a copy of the Subpoena Duces Tecum at issue as well as
related documentation served on her by the Treasury Inspector General of Tax Administration. (Doc. 2). The
Movant submitted a copy of the Subpoena Duces Tecum on October 1, 2014. (Doc. 3). The Court thereafter ordered
Movant to file the related documentation that was served on her along with the Subpoena Duces Tecum. (Doc. 4).
On December 31, 2014, the Movant submitted additional documentation. (Doc. 5).

2

1

Administration (TIGTA), 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 469, Washington, D.C. 20005; AND (2)

2

Special Agent Jason Pritchard, Office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

3

(TIGTA), P.O. Box 7881, Fresno, CA 93727.

4
5
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 26, 2015

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3