United States of America v. Chapa

Filing 8

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that the I.R.S. summons served upon Respondent, Julian C. Chapa, be enforced and that Respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S. offices 2525 Capitol Street, Ste 206, Fresno, CA before Revenue Officer Lis a R. Lopez or her designated representative, on 3/24/2017, at 10:00 a.m., as agreed to by Revenue Officer Lopez and Respondent, Julina C. Chapa, at the show cause hearing. Matter referred to Judge Drozd. Objections to F&R due within fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations; signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 3/8/2017. (Timken, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, 7 10 MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT v. 8 9 1:16-CV-01699-DAD-SKO JULIAN C. CHAPA, Respondent. 11 12 13 14 This matter came on before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on February 22, 2017, 15 under the Order to Show Cause filed November 21, 2016. (Doc. 4). The order, with the verified 16 petition filed November 8, 2016, (Doc. 1), and its supporting memorandum, (Doc. 3, Ex. 1), was 17 personally served on Respondent, Julian C. Chapa, on December 15, 2016, at his place of 18 residence, 2368 5th Street, Sanger, California. (Doc. 5). Respondent did not file an opposition 19 or a non-opposition to the verified petition as provided for in the Order to Show Cause. At the 20 hearing, Bobbie J. Montoya, Assistant United States Attorney, personally appeared on behalf of 21 Petitioner, and investigating Revenue Officer Lisa R. Lopez (formerly known as Lisa R. 22 Cumiford) was also present in the courtroom. Respondent appeared at the hearing. 23 The Verified Petition to Enforce I.R.S. Summons initiating this proceeding seeks to 24 enforce an administrative summons issued February 8, 2016. See Exhibit A to the Petition, 25 (Doc. 1, Ex. 2). The summons is part of an investigation of the Respondent to secure 26 information needed to collect the tax liability for Form 1040 for the calendar periods ending 27 December 31, 2007, December 31, 2008, December 31, 2009, December 31, 2010, December 28 31, 2011, and December 31, 2012. 30 MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT 1 1 Subject matter jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1340 and 1345, and is found to 2 be proper. I.R.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a) (26 U.S.C.) authorize the government to bring the 3 action. The Order to Show Cause shifted to Respondent the burden of rebutting any of the four 4 requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964). 5 The Court has reviewed the petition and the supporting documents. Based on the 6 uncontroverted petition verified by Revenue Officer Lisa R. Lopez and the entire record, the 7 Court makes the following findings: 8 (1) The summons (Exhibit A to the Petition, Doc. 1, Ex. 2) issued by Revenue Officer 9 Lisa R. Lopez on February 8, 2016, and served upon Respondent on February 9, 2016, seeking 10 testimony and production of documents and records in Respondent’s possession, was issued in 11 good faith and for a legitimate purpose under I.R.C. § 7602, that is, to secure information 12 needed to collect the tax liability for Form 1040 for the calendar periods ending December 31, 13 2007, December 31, 2008, December 31, 2009, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2011, and 14 December 31, 2012. 15 (2) The information sought is relevant to that purpose. 16 (3) The information sought is not already in the possession of the Internal Revenue 17 Service. 18 (4) The administrative steps required by the Internal Revenue Code have been 19 followed. 20 (5) There is no evidence of referral of this case by the Internal Revenue Service to the 21 Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. 22 (6) The verified petition and its exhibits made a prima facie showing of satisfaction of 23 the requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964). 24 (7) The burden shifted to Respondent, Julian C. Chapa, to rebut that prima facie 25 showing. 26 (8) Respondent presented no argument or evidence to rebut the prima facie showing. 27 The Court therefore recommends that the I.R.S. summons served upon Respondent, 28 Julian C. Chapa, be enforced and that Respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 30 MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT 2 1 2525 Capitol Street, Suite 206, Fresno, CA 93721-2227, before Revenue Officer Lisa R. Lopez 2 or her designated representative, on March 24, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., as agreed to by Revenue 3 Officer Lopez and Respondent, Julian C. Chapa, at the show cause hearing, then and there to be 4 sworn, to give testimony, and to produce for examining and copying the books, checks, records, 5 papers and other data demanded by the summons, the examination to continue from day to day 6 until completed, unless compliance with the summons is fully achieved prior to that date and 7 time. Should the foregoing appointment date need to be continued or rescheduled, the 8 Respondent is to be notified in writing of a later date by Revenue Officer Lopez. The Court 9 further recommends that if it enforces the summons, that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce 10 its order by its contempt power. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 11 12 assigned to the case, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of 13 the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Within fourteen (14) days 14 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 15 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be titled 16 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the 17 objections shall be served and filed within fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. 18 The District Judge will then review these findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 19 § 636(b)(1). The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 20 waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 21 1991). THE CLERK SHALL SERVE this and further orders by mail to Respondent, Julian C. 22 23 Chapa, at the following address: 2368 5th Street, Sanger, CA 93657. 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: 27 March 8, 2017 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28 30 MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT 3

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?