United States of America v. O'Connor et al

Filing 27

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 11/19/15 ORDERING that the U.S.'s 12 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED; Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of the United States for tax years 2003, 2004, and 2007. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

7

Plaintiff,

8
9
10

No. 2:14-cv-02392-GEB-CMK

v.

ORDER GRANTING UNITED STATES’
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ROBERT E. AND KAREN M.
O’CONNOR,
Defendants.

11
12

The

13

United

States

moves

for

Summary

Judgment

under

14

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 56, in which it seeks

15

an

16

Service[’s] (“IRS”) ... assessments of tax[es], penalties and

17

interest against [Defendants]” “for tax years 2003, 2004, and

18

2007]...” (Memo. Of P & A in Supp. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“Mot.”)

19

2:2-9, ECF No. 12-1.) The United States requests in its motion

20

that the Court:

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

order

that

“reduce[s]

to

judgment”

“the

Internal

determine and adjudge that Defendants Robert
E. and Karen M. O’Connor [(“Defendants”)] are
indebted to the United States in the amount
of [$]960,116.01, for unpaid federal income
tax for tax years 2003, 2004, and 2007, less
any additional credits according to proof,
plus interest and other statutory additions
as provided by 28 U.S.C. §1961(c) and 26
U.S.C. §§ 6601, 6621 from October 31, 2015
and that judgment in that amount should be
entered against [Defendants] and in favor of
the United States of America.
(Id. 6:22-7:7.)
1

Revenue

1

I. LEGAL STANDARD

2

A party seeking summary judgment under Rule 56 bears

3

the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine

4

issue of material fact for trial. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477

5

U.S. 317, 323 (1986). “A fact is ‘material’ when, under the

6

governing substantive law, it could affect the outcome of the

7

case.” Thrifty Oil Co. v. Bank of Am. Nat’l Trust & Sav. Ass’n,

8

322 F.3d 1039, 1046 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting Anderson v. Liberty

9

Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986)). An issue of material fact

10

is “genuine” when “‘the evidence is such that a reasonable jury

11

could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.’” Id. (quoting

12

Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248).

13

If

the

movant

satisfies

its

“initial

burden,”

“the

14

nonmoving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise

15

provided in Rule 56, ‘specific facts showing that there is a

16

genuine issue for trial.’” T.W. Elec. Serv., Inc. v. Pac. Elec.

17

Contractors Ass’n, 809 F.2d 626, 630 (9th Cir. 1987) (quoting

18

former Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)). “A party asserting that a fact

19

cannot be or is genuinely disputed must support the assertion by

20

citing to particular parts of material in the record . . . or

21

showing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or

22

presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party cannot

23

produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

24

56(c)(1). Summary judgment “evidence must be viewed in the light

25

most

26

inferences must be drawn in favor of that party.” Sec. & Exch.

27

Comm’n v. Todd, 642 F.3d 1207, 1215 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing

28

Johnson v. Paradise Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 251 F.3d 1222,

favorable

to

the

nonmoving

2

party,

and

all

reasonable

1

1227 (9th Cir. 2001)).

2

Further, Local Rule 260(b) prescribes:

3

8

Any party opposing a motion for summary
judgment
or
summary
adjudication
[must]
reproduce the itemized facts in the [moving
party’s] Statement of Undisputed Facts and
admit those facts that are undisputed and
deny those that are disputed, including with
each denial a citation to the particular
portions
of
any
pleading,
affidavit,
deposition, interrogatory answer, admission,
or other document relied upon in support of
that denial.

9

If

4
5
6
7

the

nonmovant

does

not

“specifically

.

.

.

10

[controvert duly supported] facts identified in the [movant’s]

11

statement of undisputed facts,” the nonmovant “is deemed to have

12

admitted the validity of the facts contained in the [movant’s]

13

statement.” Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 527 (2006).

14

18

Because a district court has no independent
duty “to scour the record in search of a
genuine issue of triable fact,” and may “rely
on the nonmoving party to identify with
reasonable particularity the evidence that
precludes
summary
judgment,”
. . .
the
district court . . . [is] under no obligation
to undertake a cumbersome review of the
record on the [nonmoving party’s] behalf.

19

Simmons v. Navajo Cnty., Ariz., 609 F.3d 1011, 1017

20

(9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Keenan v. Allan, 91 F.3d 1275, 1279 (9th

21

Cir. 1996)); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(3) (“The court need

22

consider only the cited materials, but it may consider other

23

materials in the record.”).

15
16
17

24

II. UNCONTROVERTED FACTS

25

The following facts have been deemed admitted or are

26

uncontroverted in light of the documents submitted under Local

27

Rule 260(b).1 “[Defendants] timely filed their 2003[, 2004, and

28

1

Defendants contend that several of Plaintiff’s statements of undisputed

3

1

2007] federal income tax return[s] with the [IRS].” (Defs.’ Resp.

2

to Pl.’s Statement of Undisputed Facts (“UMF”) No. 1, No. 3, No.

3

5, ECF No. 20.) “Despite th[ese] filing[s], Defendants failed to

4

pay their 2003[, 2004, and 2007] tax liabilit[ies].” (Id.) “[A]

5

duly authorized delegate of the Secretary of the Treasury made

6

assessments

7

income tax, penalties, and interest for the tax period[s] ending

8

December 31, 2003[, December 31, 2004, and December 31, 2007]”

9

(Id. No. 2, No. 4, No. 6.)

against

Defendants

for

United

States’

individual

10

“Despite notice and demand for payment, Defendants have

11

failed to pay the entirety of their tax liabilities for tax years

12

2003, 2004, and 2007.” (Id. No. 7.)

13
14
15
16
17
18

(Id. No. 8.)

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

(Id. No. 9.)

The balance of the federal income tax
liability,
including
penalties
and
interest and minus any credits for payment
received, due from Defendants for the tax
year 2003, through October 31, 2015, is
$135,488.54.
This
amount
reflects
$2,823.13 in assessed tax, $33,784.74 in
failure to pay penalty, and $98,880.67
which represents accrued and unassessed
interest.
The balance of the federal income tax
liability including penalties and interest
and
minus
any
credits
for
payments
received, due from Defendants for the tax
year 2004, through October 31, 2015 is
$477,893.68.
This
amount
reflects
$247,962.00 in assessed tax, $60,796.00 in
failure to pay penalty, and $169,135.68
which represents accrued and unassessed
interest.
The balance of the federal income
liability,
including
penalties
interest
and
minus
any
credits
payments received, due from Defendants

tax
and
for
for

facts are “disputed.” However, Defendants’ evidentiary support does not
controvert the evidence submitted by Plaintiff.

4

1

the tax year 2007, through October 31,
2015, is $346,733.39. This amount reflects
$216,675.00 in assessed tax, $54,102.24 in
failure to pay penalty, and $75,956.55
which represents accrued and unassessed
interest.

2
3
4
5

(Id. No. 10.)
“As of October 31, 2015, Defendants are indebted to the

6
7

United States in the amount of $960,116.01 for the tax years

8

2003, 2004, and 2007.” (Id. No. 11.) “This amount reflects

9

$467,460.13 in assessed tax, $148,682.98 in failure to pay

10

penalty, and $343,972.90 in accrued and unassessed interest.”

11

(Id.)
III. DISCUSSION

12
The

13

IRS

tax

assessments

in

the

motion

sub

judice

14

“establish that ... [the] assessments were properly made” for the

15

years 2003, 2004, and 2007. Koff v. United States, 3 F.3d 1297,

16

1298 (9th Cir. 1993) (quoting Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d

17

531,

18

penalties and interest against Defendants for these years have

19

not been satisfied, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is

20

granted.

540

(9th

Cir.

1992)).

Since

the

assessments

of

taxes,

The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of the

21
22

United States for tax years 2003, 2004, and 2007.

23

Dated:

November 19, 2015

24
25
26
27
28
5