United States of America v. Ingram

Filing 12

ORDER VACATING February 22, 2017 Hearing signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/15/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, 12 13 Case No. 1:16-cv-01663-AWI-SAB ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 22, 2017 HEARING v. (ECF No. 4) 14 15 JAMES W INGRAM, Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner United States of America filed a petition to enforce an Internal Revenue 18 Service (“IRS”) summons on November 2, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) On November 7, 2016, an order 19 issued requiring Respondent James W. Ingram to show cause why the IRS summons should not 20 be enforced. (ECF No. 4.) On January 6, 2017, Petitioner filed a motion to permit alternate 21 service which was denied on January 10, 2017. (ECF Nos. 8, 10.) On January 12, 2017, a 22 certificate of service was filed. (ECF No. 11.) 23 The November 7, 2016 order to show cause required Respondent to file and serve his 24 defense or opposition to the petition to enforce the summons at least ten days prior to the 25 hearing. (ECF No. 4 at 2.) The hearing is to be held in less than ten days and Respondent has 26 not filed a response or otherwise responded to the November 7, 2016 order. 27 The Local Rules of the Eastern District of California provide that “No party will be 28 entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not 1 1 been timely filed by that party.” L.R. 230(c). Therefore, t he previously scheduled hearing set on 2 February 22, 2017 shall be vacated. Accordingly, the hearing set for February 22, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 9 is 3 4 HEREBY VACATED. The parties will not be required to appear at that time. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: February 15, 2017 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?