United States of America v. Nelson
Filing
9
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/18/14 RECOMMENDING that the IRS summons served upon Respondent, Kevin Nelson, be enforced, and that Respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 4330 Watt Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95814, before Revenue Agent Agavni Angels Isayan or her designated representative, on the twenty-first (21st) day after the filing date of the District Judge's summons enforcement order, or at a later date to be set in w riting by Revenue Agent Isayan, then and there to be sworn, to give testimony, and to produce for examining and copying the books, checks, records, papers and other data demanded by the summons, the examination to continue from day to day until co mpleted. I further recommend that if it enforces the summons, the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce its order by its contempt power. Within ten (10) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Matter referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.. The Clerk shall serve this and further orders by mail to Kevin Nelson, 27 Railway, Roberts, MT 59070. (Kastilahn, 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
7 Attorneys for Petitioner United States of America
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Petitioner,
12
15
[PROPOSED] MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
AND ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMMONS
ENFORCEMENT
v.
13
14
2:14-cv-02341-GEB-EFB
KEVIN NELSON,
Respondent.
Taxpayer:
KEVIN NELSON
16
17
18
19
20
This matter came on before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on December 10,
21 2014, under the Order to Show Cause filed October 21, 2014. The order, with the verified
22 petition filed October 6, 2014, and its supporting memorandum, was personally served on
23 Respondent at his residence on November 7, 2014. Respondent did not file opposition or non24 opposition to the verified petition as provided for in the Order to Show Cause. At the hearing,
25 Yoshinori H.T. Himel, Assistant United States Attorney, personally appeared for Petitioner, and
26 investigating Revenue Agent Agavni Angela Isayan was present in the courtroom. Respondent
27 did not appear at the hearing.
28
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND
ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT
1
1
The Verified Petition to Enforce IRS Summons initiating this proceeding seeks to enforce
2 an administrative summons (Exhibit A to the petition) issued May 13, 2014. The summons is
3 part of an investigation of the respondent to secure information needed to determine the correct
4 federal income tax liabilities and statutory additions for the tax years ending December 31,
5 2006, December 31, 2007, December 31, 2008, December 31, 2009, December 31, 2010, and
6 December 31, 2011.
7
Subject matter jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1340 and 1345, and is found to
8 be proper. I.R.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a) (26 U.S.C.) authorize the government to bring the
9 action. The Order to Show Cause shifted to respondent the burden of rebutting any of the four
10 requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).
11
I have reviewed the petition and documents in support. Based on the uncontroverted
12 petition verified by Revenue Agent Agavni Angela Isayan and the entire record, I make the
13 following findings:
14
(1) The summons issued by Revenue Agent Agavni Angela Isayan on May 13, 2014, and
15 served on May 13, 2014, seeking testimony and production of documents and records in
16 respondent’s possession, was issued in good faith and for a legitimate purpose under I.R.C.
17 § 7602, that is, to secure information needed to secure information needed to determine the
18 correct federal individual income taxes and statutory additions for the years ending December
19 31, 2006, December 31, 2007, December 31, 2008, December 31, 2009, December 31, 2010,
20 December 31, 2011.
21
(2) The information sought is relevant to that purpose.
22
(3) The information sought is not already in the possession of the Internal Revenue
23 Service.
24
(4) The administrative steps required by the Internal Revenue Code have been followed.
25
(5) There is no evidence of referral of this case by the Internal Revenue Service to the
26 Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
27
(6) The verified petition and its exhibits made a prima facie showing of satisfaction of the
28 requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND
ORDER RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT
2
1
(7) The burden shifted to respondent, Kevin Nelson, to rebut that prima facie showing.
2
(8) Respondent presented no argument or evidence to rebut the prima facie showing.
3
I therefore recommend that the IRS summons served upon Respondent, Kevin Nelson, be
4 enforced, and that Respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 4330 Watt Avenue,
5 Sacramento, CA 95814, before Revenue Agent Agavni Angels Isayan or her designated
6 representative, on the twenty-first (21st) day after the filing date of the District Judge’s
7 summons enforcement order, or at a later date to be set in writing by Revenue Agent Isayan,
8 then and there to be sworn, to give testimony, and to produce for examining and copying the
9 books, checks, records, papers and other data demanded by the summons, the examination to
10 continue from day to day until completed. I further recommend that if it enforces the summons,
11 the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce its order by its contempt power.
12
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
13 assigned to the case, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 72-304 of the Local
14 Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Within ten (10)
15 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
16 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be titled
17 "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections
18 shall be served and filed within ten (10) days after service of the objections. The District Judge
19 will then review these findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The
20 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to
21 appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
22
THE CLERK SHALL SERVE this and further orders by mail to Kevin Nelson, 27
23 Railway, Roberts, MT 59070.
24
It is SO ORDERED.
25 DATED: December 18, 2014.
26
27
28
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?