Noll v. Peterson et al

Filing 27

ORDER FINDING CLIFFORD L. NOLL A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT AND IMPOSING PRE-FILING RESTRICTIONS granting 10 Motion to Deem Clifford L. Noll a Vexatious Litigant and for Entry of Pre-Filing Order. Plaintiff, Clifford L. Noll, is PROHIBITED from filing any civil pleadings in this Court challenging the assessment or collection of federal income taxes (either filed against the United States or against federal officers) unless and until those pleadings have been reviewed by a District Judge or Magistrate Judge for possible legal merit pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 prior to being electronically filed and served, and that the United States, or individual defendants sued in their official or individual capacities, must only respond to s uch pleadings when ordered to by this Court.Signed by Senior Judge Wm. Fremming Nielsen. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/17/2015: # 1 Appendix 1, 92-cv-282, # 2 Appendix 2, 93-cv-100, # 3 Appendix 3, 94-cv-521, # 4 Appendix 4, 96-cv-280 part 1 of 3, # 5 Appendix 4, 96-cv-280-1 part 2 of 3, # 6 Appendix 4, 96-cv-280 part 3 of 3, # 7 Appendix 5, 97-c v-145 part 1 of 3, # 8 Appendix 5, 97-cv-145 part 2 of 3, # 9 Appendix 5, 97-cv-145 part 3 of 3, # 10 Appendix 6, 99-cv-590, # 11 Appendix 7, 01-cv-2, # 12 Appendix 8, 02-cv-87, # 13 Appendix 9, 02-cv-484, # 14 Appendix 10, 03-cv-34, # 15 Appendix 11, 12-cv-138) (cjs). Modified on 9/17/2015 to reflect electronic notice and mailing regenerated for attached Appendices (cjs).

Appendix 1
Noll v. United States, 1:92-CV-282-HLR (D. Idaho)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
CLIFFORD L. NOLL and SUSAN J. NOLL,
husband and wife,
Plaintiff,

vs.

CIV 9 2-0? 8 2

CIVIL NO. ________

s - E.Jr

BETTY YOUNG, Revenue Officer,
Dept. of Treasury-Internal Revenue
Service, and JAY HAMMER, Disclosure

COMPLAINT

Officer for Internal Revenue ServiceDept. of Treasury, and GERALD R. RYAN,)
Special Assistant to the Assistant
Chief Counsel (Disclosure Litigation)
Dept. of the Treasury-Internal

By Sunny Trumbull
on Jul 23, 2015 3:55 pm

Revenue Service.
Defendants.

This matter arises under Positive Law of the United States, namely
Title 5 of the United States Code.

Comes now the plaintiffs, Clifford L. Noll and Susan J. Noll,
husband and wife, who's mailing address is 715 N. 13th St., Coeur
d'Alene, Idaho 83814, setting forth the following complaint;

1.

A.) Title 5

u.s.c.

sect. 556(d), provides as follows: "When

jurisdiction is challenged the burden of proof is on
the government." The plaintiffs, Clifford L. Noll and
Susan J. Noll, sought written proof of jurisdictional
authority claimed by the Dept. of the Treasury-Internal
Revenue Service over the plaintiffs, Clifford L. Noll
and Susan J. Noll. This information would assist the
plaintiffs to know and 01understand the rules, regulations,

r--

1

and procedures by

which this agency asserts its limited

territorial jurisdiction confined by Title 4 USC
section 72. Title 26 USC section 7621 provides internal
revenue districts only for purposes of convenience to
administer the internal revenue laws consistent with
Title 4 USC section 72 and article 1, section 8 of the
U.S. Constitution. See Penn Mutual Indemnity Co. v. Comm.,
32 T.C.

(1959), CCH at page 659. It has been well settled

that the requestor must

d~termine

whether the agency's

employee is acting within the bounds of their authority
which is not just limited to an agreement. Bornstein
et al. v. U.S., 61-1 USTC para. 9421

(1965), 1965 Standard

Federal Tax Reports. Also see Federal Corp Insurance
v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 · (1947)

00

" •••

He who deals

with an agent of the government must look to his
authority, which will not be presumed but must be
established. He cannot rely upon the scope of dealing
or apparent authority as in the case of a private agent."
See exhibit 1.
B.) The plaintiffs, Clifford L. Noll and Susan J. Noll sought
specific information under Title 5 USC, Section
552,(Freedom of Information Act) to discover all records
which supports the claims of the Dept. of the TreasuryInternal Revenue Service for money demanded and liens
filed.
(1 .) Internal Revenue Service assessed a 1040 "kind of tax".
(See see exhibit "A", as shown on the face of the subject
notice.) Congress has not authorized the assessment
or collection of a 1040 "Kind of Tax", however they did
authorize the assessment and collection of Income, Estate

& Gift, Corporation, Self-employment, Social Security,
and Unemployment Taxes. See Title 26 U.S.C.

02

(

·

(2.) The Subject of the lien is legally unenforcable where
the Secretary has not provided the content of the subject
"form" as required by I.R.C. Sec. (323(f)(3) which
provides in the pertinent part ••• (3). Form- the form
and content of the notice referred to in subsection (a)
shall be prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall
prescribe the form and content of the notice of Federal
Tax Lien through promulagation of Treasury Regulations.
(See

~.R.C.

Sec. 7805(a).

See exhibit 2.
C.)

JAY HAMMER, Disclosure Officer for the Internal Revenue
Service-Dept. of the Treasury stated that he had located
the documents requested by the plaintiffs under the
Freedom of Information Act and a payment of $119.00 was
required to cover the costs of duplication.
See exhibit 3.

D.) The Dept. of the Treasury-Internal Revenue Service
received and cashed the plaintiffs money order.
See exhibit 4.
E.) The plaintiffs, Clifford L. Noll and Susan J. Noll, not
having received the information sought, filed a Freedom
of Information Act Appeal, still seeking the information.
See exhibit 5.
F.) GERALD R. RYAN, Special Assistant to the Assistant Chief
Counsel (Disclosure Litigation} Dept. of the TreasuryInternal Revenue Service, refused to supply the
information sought stating that the plaintiffs had
exhausted all administrative remedies and this matter

03

would be more appropriately addressed in a judicial
proceeding.
See exhibit 6 and 7.
2.

BETTY YOUNG, Revenue Officer for the Internal Revenue
Service-Dept. of the Treasury, did not have lawful authority
to place liens on properties owned by the plaintiffs. See
Title 26 USC, section 6203., and 26 CFR 301.6203-1, which
requires a "hand made" delegation of authority.

3.

The relief sought by plaintiffs, Clifford L. Noll and Susan
J. Noll, is;
a) to have this court order the Dept. of the Treasury-Internal
Revenue Service to relinquish all claims and/or liens
involved in this matter.
b) to have this court order the Dept. of the Treasury-Internal
Revenue Service to immediately return $119.00 which
they required for duplication of records, and after cashing
the money order, refused to send the information paid
for.

Dated this __

~~____day
-_

of July, 1992

~ZUQ

eli

ord L. Noll

~~4.~¢
Susan

04

01011

AFFIDAVIT

The undersigned, Clifford 1. Noll, and Susan J, Noll, declare
that the foregoing facts in the complaint are true and correct
to the best of our knowledge.

C 1fford L. Noll

Dated this
--

Notary Public

05

~-

~ ~·

.. s. "'
g
.:-

p

:;:;a

:a

S\.

9
~

"'
"'
'i'

~

'!

...
"'

-- ~

o<D3
-

z.
!!!.
"

'??-

:::::

:::>-

"'
~

;t
S\.

~

0

"~"'

~

!"

'"
..

a
::s

""""
6.~
,...,

;:;:(a
o<n

3

. Ze>.""

-;;;--

:::>'3

"'
~

-4C:~

('

II>~

~c

:7

'""" ~
c: 3

e>.

en

'"-o

i0~
-

oO

;~8:

t/)

*- ,.--~~
5.'
~~

~co

... CD

·-Ps-Fo~~·iaoo, June 1990 (Reverse)

t- (/J

co-

a.g

~g.,o.

:7

"'
a

!>10

~a~

S\.

< ~o·'§-

~a

a3~

;?.
"'

~a

VI

lo. l

~~~
0
:::>

~

3"'

!=<

V)

e>.

c;'g

-?

Cliffor~

71

s n.

CO ~)Ur

Noll & Susan Noll

13th

st .

D ' .?\lene , Id •. :33 8 11
J

SS 0 203-36 - 9997

.... . •"' '1.

~

160-12-0GGO
1 99 1

October
("'1

•

•

Internal nevenue ,_,ervlce
550 H. Port :-:; t .

Boise , Id. 83 72 4
Internal nevenuc Service
1650 Hission St .

San Francisco,

C~ .

941 0 3

SEHVICE , Aim i:10'I'ICE 0F C;:IALL[';i·JGE OF

SJ~ I~VICE

ST~I'm.

hereby u d vise us i !LF< i.cl'tely a.s to each
1ed

of jurisdictional aut!1ori ty the
called t !w

I H ~:' ;'.: P.PAL

P.EVEHUE

an(~.

Gvery

S~~ 7:~ VIC::

clai r~

(hcn;aft2r

v1hic ~1

I RS ) (;nj oy:3 and/ or othcrt.lise claims to h3.ve

provides jurisdiction ~nd/or authority over us. This is to also
include , but not

li~ite d

to, Constitutional , Statutory ,

Cont~act

and/or ~ erchant Law(s). •
~aid information is ' n2cessary to enable us to adequately prep~re

a meaningful anJ affirmative defence to the charges, allegations,
anu/or penal ties imposed thus protecting our right to Due P:coc·2 ss
and Eq ual Protection.
Should the ID.S clv.i m contract L:n·1/j urisc}iction ,
to

l~now

c.o here;JY d e ,,1o.nr:_
1

what contract (includ ing, but not limited to, title , d ate,

ui tness ( GS) thcr ·: ;)to, an d 2.ll p artie:-:; t h ereto)
and

He

~-lillfully

".78

hav ·=~

1

mo~dn:i 1 Y

en t0red into to ;?rovicle any sud1 nlle • c r1 j
J

EXHibtT

06

nd.s ·.~ictio !.l.

Further , PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that we do hereby chal l enge your
jur i sd ic ti on and/or autho r i ty in this ;-untter , anc1 do further n;sc:in'l
any and al l

s i gnatures we have placed upon any and all

whi c h are in effect

docu~ent ( s)

with your agency .

Hespe c tfu ll y ,

Mernor amdum of Po ints of Law
It is a pr i n c ip l e o f law that , once chal l enged , the person asc2rting
jurisdictio n- -

~1UST

PROV:C TJI7\.T ,JOIUSDIC'I'I0!•1

•ro

E~~IS'l'

Y> .!\

!'!J."\'1:".',' 7 ~;-~

OP LA\'J .

: ee :
S

M NUTT v . G. M., 56 S . Ct . 789 , 80 L .
c
~ASSO

v . U. P . L ., 4 95

·ruo_
r,1son v . G.?\;:;raBr_, ,

I r1o here:)y

c~rtify

on the Internal

~ . 2d

11 35

90G

62 s . ct . 673 , 33 r. . Ed . 1 1 1

t .n at I havo

::::~venue

E~ .

s2rv•~d

a true copy of this

docu c:v~nt

Service and/or its District :)ir2ctor by

certified mail with Return Receipt Requested . Said service affectc0
at Coeur d ' Alene , !d . 838 1 4 .
Date- - - -

07

r

COUR. RECORDING DATA
----------------~-----------------------+-------------------------------------INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Lien Recorded
: 07/24/89 - 02:39am
FEDERAL TAX LIEN FACSIMILE DOCUMENT
Recording Number : 338226
NOTICE of FEDERAL TAX LIEN
------------------------------~---------+-------------------------------------District: Boise, ID
I IRS Serial Number: 828902485

I
--------------------::::-::::-:::-::::-:::::-::-::::::::::-::::---------------,
Internal Revenue Regulation 301.6323{!}-1.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name of Taxpayer :
CLIFFORD L NOLL

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Residence :
PO BOX 198
PINEHURST, ID

83850

--~!t~:~!~i~~~~t~:=;~~::;~~;~~~~~=~~;{:~~l~~~:~~t!~::~f:~~:~:::::-----------l
the certificate of release of lien as defined in IRC 6325(a).
-------+----------+-------------+------------+-----------------+--------------Form I Period I ID Number I Assessed I Refile Deadline I Unpaid Balance
-~~~---+----~~~---+-----~=~-----+-----~~~----+--------~~~------+------~:~ _____ j
1040
12/31/76
203-36-9997
11/10/88
12/10/94
18002.06
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040

12/31/77
12/31/78
12/31/79
12/31/80
12/31/81
12/31/82
12/31/83
12/31/84

203-36-9997
203-36-9997
203-36-9997
203-36-9997
203-36-9997
203-36-9997
203-36-9997
203-36-9997

11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88

12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94

8974.83
16764.91
24417.59
5102.41
11588.14
11256.06
10833.68
18977.12

------------------------------------------------------------------------------COUNTY RECORDER
Filed at:
SHOSHONE
Wallace,

ID

Total

83873

$

125916.80

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Title:
Authorizing Official:
This notice was prepared and executed at Boise, ID
on this, the 17th day of July, 1989.

Revenue Officer

BETTY YOUNG [phone]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ex u1~1T d
08

r

. //

I

,1.

COUk~

RECORDING DATA

----------------------------------------+-------------------------------------INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Lien R~corded ~ : 07/24/89 - 02:39am
FEDERAL TAX LIEN

Record~ng

FA~SIMILE DOCUMENT

Number : 338227

NOTICE of FEDERAL TAX LIEN

----------------------------------------+-------------------------------------I IRS Serial Number: 828902487
I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

District: Boise, ID

1

This Lien Has Been Filed in Accordance with
Internal Revenue Regulation 301.6323(f)-1.

______________________________________________________________________________ l
Name of Taxpayer
SUSAN V NOLL
----------------------------------------------------------~--------------------

Residence :
PO BOX 198
PINEHURST, ID

83850

------------------------------------------------------------------------------With respect to each assessment below, unless notice of lien
1

is refiled by the date in column(e), this notice shall constitute
the certificate of release of lien as defined in IRC 6325(a).

-------+----------+-------------+------------+-----------------+--------------Form I Period I ID Number I Assessed I Refile Deadline I Unpaid Balance
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
I
-------+----------+-------------+------------+-----------------+--------------1040
12/31/76
160-42-8660*
11/10/88
12/10/94
13295.36
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040

12/31/77
12/31{78
12/31/79
12/31/80
12/31/81
12/31/82
12/31/83
12/31/84

160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*
160-42-8660*

11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88
11/10/88

12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94
12/10/94

4307.63
11514.12
17915.77
1513.75
2427.13
2722.81
2740.44
5144.80

------------------------------------------------------------------------------COUNTY RECORDER

Filed at:

SHOSHONE
Wallace,

ID

Total

83873

$

61581.81

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Title:
Authorizing Official:
This notice was prepared and executed at Boise, ID
on this, the 17th day of July, 1989.

Revenue Officer

BETTY YOUNG [phone]

I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

09

r
.·

•t

- XHibiT3
E

~ ~ / }1

·; (!()()

l i f f ''"i. ,i T, • :<..1 • ' 'I I
'i ·1 .,i 7·5 • I '), I h fit· •
Cr :· P'n· d ' ; 1 fliP'\ . Tr!

(~

-, ·,•·)Hl''

Th ·l ~'~ i .r.~ ·in r·t.:<qp;·· n ~P. 1: 1) ;:,n d
(}.:,J 1: G\f~ ~·lt:'>'. ' ~t tit\ I f ' ) '
\ r
'l t:)'.f'J
19 9 1 •

~-: .~~

lt i'.in:-'

Hl:'~~lt'-· (" h

(··:~rnn 'l t• l .!1d
r nnf-l

1
·n

Fr' t;\{'~l ' (; i'!l (• f
l \' P'~ in

rr,-\C fl!

1'"· .--..:: r=::·~ ;:~ :lno

l.. h P

h~'' ~; ·t t •L()I\,

'TC•

Tll

• f' yr.•tn·
:·

r-•9H'' ,.:d \·p

f

:'),:~ t· .,_- c:~ qtt (..•~'j 1'.
1 'J .

pt'hlr1l '1 Oil

01.1r

c. ffi ,- ~<.; t·-J ,_- ,.,-,.;m b f·; ·r

r,~,.P''"'~lt

l'h t;!

d~-~ ~ ~-~ , .. ,,,lttPd

:::1n d

1 ·~ ·:~:-.ti' Pd

d i"!l.: tHt H'"I"' 'I' f\

'-1

c h ;.,,:lt •Yr' i•'l '": rtt-~ ~~- r: n l 8r , m :-Hh~ ,.,-'1\':'Jtd A t~) t tlf-' ln~· pt" ll :'l-1 ~~~"·- f·'llltt~
:~~r ·._ i c Ft , rnP ::!I. t·, ,_ re cn i · · ·'=1 d .tu tll'in , ,t f ·l cn .t.:lt .ldn :~0 ..-Lnf'.. Thr-'
,
f.oH !f> aYf"<' f. i:·.r :ro::d mblf1'· SF:tnt~1·,t· f c..r >HYn· i •"(,~~-~ ['f'~:· f('r·w~d r:t n •i :.n · t:.. n -·:.t·
rr-dttnd '>hl(:. .

P1P <HH~ -, - ~,,l._ llrn :) ····.' '!"'·\ · ,J{ il't ·l · • _l{-J 1tJ '· ' ::d ;- ·11<:1 ,; Jih ,-,·,,,r· fH ) i' "" '' ·t· .
~:\<• 1 ( <h ltlr·('•qf:'t('i) <:on•.: ·c~ l · ··r •t=:' ·l q i t tr·· ·ltld Pd f n r y nq ·r ,, _:;,-; ~.
r.• l"'' i' -,_ r'- 111 ·
:

1;1~· •1 1 1·

i . .- :~

i

,.~,·l ,

i 1. 'I

)' ('; t_
ll

f"

t ' f'•' ' >'

'I·

<•

1.:

."l Pf'l<{

•'Jnr~'l!lo'H.'di 'l. i·' r·r;··< f";"; 11 ~·- •

_.('>I I
\

I' h (:,

.-r '" ·~

p:-tj_

H ~1 1r•uH-1 r ·

A r·p t ~·H·t ·J. •

4
~v;{ ;_:-/-fv- /:..~.,~~(

rl'i ~H • 1;·) ·'n.n ·'-'

.-H'

r i , :•·' r·

~~ t( -~~~(/9,lJZS
~k Cf,t111

I·

- ~

(?L;H~

10

1

- --~u

:. r: :. ~
•

·~ ;J

\.

i '· ,,.,

'
j· ,,

~

:,~-.-.·~-~---------~,,
.

11

lddrtr/ .ee, endorr'

r

r

I receipt
s
r

January 23, 1992
Clifford L. Noll
71 5 N• 1 3th S t •
Coeur d'Alene, Id. 83814

ss

# 203-36-9997

Freedom of Information Appeal
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Ben Franklin Station
P.O. Box 829
Washington D.C. 20044

Dear Sirs,

This letter is in reference to a letter ( copy enclosed ) from
your office dated December 17, 1991 in which your agent, Gerald
R. Ryan, inferred that I \.Vould receive the inforhtatlon I hn.ve
sought through the Freedom of Information Act sometime around
the first week of January 1992. Since the information has not
arrived and your letter states that the statutory period for
your response to my appeal ended January 2, 1992, be advised
that

THIS LETTER IS A FORMAL DEMAND to remove all liens placed

my pers6n and or property for tho following raasons;
1.

The agency, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), has failed
to respond to my written challenge for jurisdiction as
provided in Title 5

u.s.c.,

section 556 (d), as follows:

" When jurisdiction is challenged the burdan of proof
is on the government."

12

./

2.

The agency ( IRS ) has failed to respond timely to
Freedom of Information Act requests.

3.

The agency (IRS ) has failed to respond timely to a
properly submitted Freedom of Information Act Appeal.

4.

The uncollected taxes claimed for the years 1976, 1977,
1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, and 1984 are beyond
the statute of limitation and are therefore
uncollectable.

If all liens filed against me and/ or my property by this agency
are not permanently removed within thirty (30) days from your
receipt of this letter, I will file a Title 5 action in Federal
District Court to resolve this matter.

Sincerely,

Clifford L. Noll

13

/

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D .C. 20224
OFFICE OF
CHIEF COUNSEL

CC:D:7155-92
BrT:Johnson

Mr. Clifford L. Noll
715 N. 13th st.
Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814
Dear Mr. Noll:
This is in response to your letter, dated November 29, 1991,
in \llhich you !!lought an adininistrati ve app~al "Under th~ Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) concerning . your October 22, 1991, request
to the IRS in Boise, ID and San Francisco, CA.
The FOIA does not require agencies to respond to
interrogatories . . It also does not require agencies to conduct
research to determine which resolution, decision, or statute you
are seeking. Neither does the Act require an agency to respond
to statements which appear to be more appropriately addressed in
a judicial proceeding.
One of the FOIA's requirements is that requesters
sufficiently identify the records solicited in order to locate
them. To the extent you are seeking records which establish the
authority of the Internal Revenue Service to assess, enforce, and
collect taxes, please be advised of the following.
The sixteenth
Amendment to the Constitution authorized Congress to impose an
income tax.
Congress did so in the Internal Revenue Code, which
may be found at Title 26 of the United States Code. The IRS
administers the Internal Revenue Code. The Code contains
information that may be responsive to your request. While the
Code is available at many bookstores and public libraries
throughout the country, it is also available to you upon written
request to the district disclosure office that satisfies the
procedural requirements set forth in 26 C.F.R. §601.702. The
cost for duplicating the entire Code is approximately $500. If
you are not interested in obtaining the entire Code, you may
submit a request that identifies the specific sections, by
number, that you desire. Or you may submit a written request
that seeks to inspect . the Code at your local district office.
After inspecting the Code, you may identify the sections you wish
copied and, upon remittance of the appropriate copying fees, if
any, receive them. Alternatively, copies of the Internal Revenue
Code may be purchased in bookstores or read in public libraries.

14

r

I

~

.

Finally, income tax filing requirements are supported by
statute, and implementing regulations, which may be challenged
through the judicial system, but not the FOIA. There has been no
denial of agency records to consider on appeal. Accordingly, we
are closing our file in this matter.
Sincerely,

~//k--

GERALD R. RYAN
Special Assistant
(Disclosure Litigation)

')

15

r

....~-

By Sunny Trumbull
on Jul 23, 2015 3:55 pm

IN THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT
CLIFFORD L. NOLL and SUSAN J. NOLL,)
husband and wife,
)
C:I:VIL NO. 92-0282-S-:-HLR

)

Plaintiffs-,

)

)

v.

)
)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)
)
)

Defendant.

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
AND DISMISSING ACTION

~~~----~--------~~~~~-->

I.

FACTS & PROCEDURE

On July 2·1, 1992, the above-entitled action was filed and
assigned to the Honorable Edward J. Lodge.

Thereafter, several

motions were filed and a hearing on pending motions was ultimately scheduled for

Fe~ruary

26, 1993.

on February 19, 1993,

pursuant to an Order of Reassignmjant, this case. was reqssigned to
"• •

-

-

'

~

•

I

'

/'

this court because it ' involves plaintiffs situated in ·northern
.
-:
..
Idaho.

Accordingly, the hearing previously set before Judge

Lodge was vacated.
Upon receipt of this action, this court undertook a thorough
review of the record herein.

During the e.ourse of such review,

the court came upon a handwritten letter- dated February 5, 1993,
from Plaintiff Clifford Noll.

The .lett·er essent_ ally notes a
i

concern that the prior hearing date of February 26, 1993, would
take place after a marshal's sale scheduled for February 24, 1993.

16

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
'111>.Tn

nTCl!VTCl!Cl!T,.Tr.!

'JI.~IIITf'lt.J

""

1 .

r
Mind,ful of . these time fram.es, thi~ court ; qar· fully conside
·
· ....
....

,

'•

ered the allega.t~ons contained - ~il~:the;, Col!lpl_a-~rit::, · tog.et~er· ~lith
...
.

.

.

.. .·- _._

~--

.•

-~·

the arguments contal.ned 1n the

........"
• ' :_~: ....:.~:----_ .-.-_

.

.

. ·.,-_

~---/::-.,·;:~--~~ -:..~-

.

~-

--._ t' "-- ~ ;

1~. 92J , plai~tiff.s'~ ~'Mo~:±.~n· ;~,~-~ \;~d;~merit.

filed on October : 14,

.

,

..

.$ tates !·· Mot1on . to 01sm1ss

Un1.-t~d

.

,

, ·:

·.

I

(c
sic]

filed on September 30, l .992 '; and plaintiffs'··.ffibt'ioh to 1amend
filed on Febr\,lary 8, 19·93.

. ....

'

....

- ~

~.~.-'

: ..

Plaintiffs' Complaint basically. seeks an . order requiring the
'·
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to relinqUish· al:l _
claims and liens
involving the .plaintiffs and . to reft.md. $119 .-QO which plaintiffs
.

~<-·

..- . ~

paid for the duplication . of records ·that t_h.~y· alteg~dly never
,..
._.
---.

'"';.

received.
Because the court finds that
-

-

-

a

.

~earing

irr :this
·:

-.

.

--·-

case .would

,.

-

.

.

not aid the decision makiflg.·_ proces_s.~, one.' sha J.-1 . riot be , scheduled.
•

Insfeaq,

ba~~d ·an
-

•

the

'

•

r

;::(( /

:iec~rci, ''this'~b:6~:Ft _.. finc}§
-

•

-.·

--

•

••

:.··

-;:.

:.

t

:

'-

'

_,•·

·t ·l1c;;.#

,c

~-

-· •• ' .

.th.~
-

•

'

·motion to
•••

~-

-

dismiss shall . be . granted tor lack of ' ~lib~ e 6 t matter- j ur:t.sdiction.
The court finds further that plaintiffs' motion for_ judgment and
motion to amend should be summarily d.e!ll:ed . .
II.
A.

ANALYSIS

The Proper Party Defendant'.·

Plaintiffs nained three 'IRS agents as · defenda-~ts ·1~ this
case.

The Ninth circuit Cour-t of _
Appeals -· has held that> "a suit

against IRS employees in theiroffici&l capaei:ty .is es&entially a
suit against the United states."
1455, 1458 (9th Cir. 1985).

Gilbert v. DaGI:'ossa, 756 F.2d

Accordingly, . finding that the United

States is the only proper party defendant in .this 9ase, the

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
~ND

DISMISSING

~CTION.

D.2

17

,_

.
action

acj"i:d-nst q;~e'tty Ye~hg, - J~~<Iia.~~f: ·-an~i ~e~ai& :-R_., ~Rian;---~h-~11
.
.
.-:_··
..
.
.
.

be dismissed, and

~

•"

__

~·

~-

":_~ -

-

·'

'

T ' uni ted' s'ta.t:es'~<~_};Hi;l, -1 --~e -c-~\.l~_~tituted :as
he

.

the

named defendant. B.

The Government's Motion ·to ~Dismiss

on behalf of the defendant~ named by plaintiff~, the united
ac-t ~:on purs.~a-nt

States _
filed a motion to dismiss - hi_
t s

to -

Rule 12(-b) (1) , . -JS) and -(6) o:f'-.the :< -·:,..,_ ederal .Rules o·f CiYil
F
·,.
. .·:
~

Thi~ court - ~inds t:l'ie applicat~qii. ·o :i ,::R:Ul~. 12 (b_)
..

Procedure.

(l) to

~~

be largely disposi-tive in. this · case.. -1

Therefore, tlje focus of

the following . analysis _wfi1 be~ on -~thEi , ·la:ck- of s ubjedt matt~r
.

'

.
.
)'Url:S d' t ' .
l.C _l.On._- _,
·.•

-_.

Beyond plaintiffs·'~' desi.'J;e' -to_ obpain a refurtd - of· 'moneys paid
to the IRS urider - the Freeddm· of . Info:r;mation· A¢t ~ 2_ t _ e· thrust -of
h
plaintiffS I .C Omplaint Cha,ll·engeS the _:ef.fort.S o {~ Va-ri:OUS - empl-oyeeS
·- '
.
..
·,
. -._

.

~-

.

-,

'

._

of the IRS and seeks to obtain - re.l ief:· from :collection .activities
'

'

•

1

·,.,;-

:._-·

-

-

of the IRS.

Technically, because plainti- fs never filed a brief in
f
opposition to the government's _ mot.i:pn; the· government's motion
should be summarily _granted ·. pur_
suant to .·-· L.o cal · _
Rule . 7 .• 1 (d) .
r
f
and- be.c ause
Howeve- , because the plainti- fs ar·e proceedim]' pr'o
this court prefers to 'decide matters based on their merits, the
court will proceed with an analysi~ of theappllcablestatutes.

:se,

2
Al.t hough plaintiffs have ci·early _ fa).led - t0 - establish a
jurisdictional basis. foi ;pursuif1g- .: their ~-c,la1iii ;,~ for ' a ·ref~nd of
$119. oo paid under the .,., 'Freedom ·o t;- :tnformat) ?c
;nl ;A ct, even if
jurisdiction were . not ·lacking, pursua:n t - te Rur e : I-2 (b) (6) of the
Fede-ral Rules of civi-l P:roc~du:z;:-e i this·-·c ,o.u.+ t - f_i_ ds that ' dismissal
n
of this claim wotild be appropriate becauseplaint,iffs have failed
to state a claim upon .whi ch relief can be· granted.

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
AND DISMISSING ACTION. D.3

18

The Anti-Injunction' Act proh~bit:!? a - taxpay~r- _-from bringing a
II

SUit for the pUrpOSe Of restraining the "aSSeSSment_ Or CQl,lec::tion

of any tax
strictly.

II

26

u.s.c.

§

7421(a).

The Act is enforced

See Maxfield v . . United St'a tes Postal 'serv .", 752 F. 2d

433, 43.4 (9th Cir. 1984).

A district court must dismiss for lack

of sub.ject matter jurisdiction any suit falling. w.ithin the Act's
proscription.
1990).

Elias v. Conrie~t, 908 F.2d 5~i, 52i (9th Cir.

Thus, ordinarily_ once a tax has been assessed, the
;

taxpayer's only recourse is to appeal to - the taxc::ourt or to pay
the tax in full . and then sue for a refund in district court.
United States
..

v.

. See

Condo, 782 F.2<i 1592 ., ,1506 (9th. <;.ir. 1986..).
.
·.-·
,

.

_..

•.

-~

Aside from statutory exceptions that are ·inappli,c_
able here, one
judicial exce~tion to the Act d6es exist~ Elias v. Connett, 908
.

t

.

.

.

F. 2d a.t 523.

For that exception to apply I however I the taxpayer

must demonstrat·e that (i) under no · circumstances could the
government ultimately prevail on the merit- .; and . (2) . the taxpayer
s
will suffer irreparable injury without injunctive relief.

!d. at

525 (emphasis added) .
Where, as here, plaintiffs' action attempts ·to impede the
collection activities of · the IRS ·and does not begin to meet the
burden of demonstrating that the government would not ultimately
.
.. .
·.·.

·•,•.

prevail on the merits, or .that they would suffer irreparable
injury without injunctive relief, .the action is barred by the
Anti-Injunction Act.

!d. at 526.

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
~Nn

nTSMTSSTNG

~CTTON.

n.4

Nor can plaintiffs establish

19

( '
. ~~- .. _ .,.

.I

. that this court has jurisdic.t~on: und~~~ the Dedlal:'atoi::y Judgment
Act,· 28 u.s.c.

220· , or the 'Adnd.. :r:d,strative Pr~ced\J.re Act,
1

§

See Hughes v. united ~tates, 95..J F / 2d 531, 536-

5 u.s. c. § 702.
37 (9th Cir.

19921~

· Therefore, this action ~hall ' be dismissed
.
.

'

~

..

.

..·(

for lack of subject matter. jurisdiction.• .
..
.
~.

c.

Plaintiffs' Moti6ns
1. ·

Motion for judgment.

Plaintiffs filed a Motien for Judcj'ement [sic] on _
September -30, 1992.

Mindful'. of the ' app+icable · rules .-- and giyen
;_.

-~.

the allegations. contained irf t:lie 'c~inp~·a-int, · ~h~~-: c_
ourt f .inds that
..

such motion ~hould be sununarfly ' denied.
•

•

•

-::~·- .. --·· /

-.

'-~

In adq~,t tion to rioting

r,;.

:

the arguments raised by the govern:ment regarding whether or- not
service was properly effected 'in . this cas·. _ ' - .his ·court fil)ds that
e , t ::·
.
'
...
.
-~'

'

.

'.

~

.

-

·-

~.

plaintiffs have simply not establi- hed _ hat they are ·e nt·itled to
s
t
the relief requested in thei- .c omplaint.
r

The.r efore·, pursui:}nt to

Rule 55(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil· Proc.e dure, this court is
precluded from entering jud,gjnent . agains:t:- the , United States.
.
...-.....
:.

2.

Proposed amendments to co~piaidt~

On october 26; i993, plaintiffs- filed - a document
entitled Amendment to

Pl~adirtg~

Later 1 , on February 8, 1993,
.,._ . . ·

plaintiffs filed a document eFltitled ;Nnerided · & ;SupplimeFttal [sic]
'

-:-

Pleadings 3
.

'

"

-

~

.·

with an Amendment to Co~plaint attached thereto.
- ..
-' .
.
...
.;

.

~

- ,-_

Plaintiffs seek to add· additional .pr?t-yers for relief:- to their
3

The court shall construe this document as a mot'ion to

amend.

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
AND DYSMYSSYNG ACTYON. D.S

20

..
( -

Complaint including, inter alia, reques.t s that · this court delay the
United States Marshal's sale scheauled· fro.m · F:e·br~ary 2'4, 1993;
order all proceeds from the propertY 1:o

be

he~d- · in escr0w \in til

this matter is settled; . order· the ag.e ncy ·-t o amend all of .plaintiffs' records to show the amount ow. d ·to be zero for
e

a~l

yea:rs

involved; order that the. agency return all money collected; and
.
....
...
... ,
order that the agency pay_ damages and .i .s sue an ap()l·ogy to plain'

,.

:

'.

-

.

tiffs~

· As discussed above, this court clearly lacks jurisdiction to entertain this action.

The amended complaint proposed by

plaintiffs actually enhances, rather. than -cures · such ·juri-sdic,
.
·.·
.
. ·.
.

tional defects.

~

-~.

Therefore-, ·since no purpose .is served by ail ow-

ing plaintiffs to amend their Complaint, the motion to amend
shall be denied.
III.

C?RDER

Based on the foregoing and the ,c;ourt 'b'eing .fully advis.e d· in
the premises,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, as reflected in the caption of
this order, Defendants Betty Young·, Jay H,anuner and Gerald R. Ryan
are hereby DISMISSED, and the United ·S- ates t
of America is substituted as the named defendant.

Ail further documents filed ·by the

parties herein shall refie~t the same.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States'. Motion to
Dismiss should be, and is hereby, GRANTED; and this action should

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
~Nn

nTAMTAATN~

~~TTON.

n.~

21

..

,.....

,.

be, and is hereby DISMISSED for' ia6:k . o:f ·sul5]ect' :matter jtirisdic. ~.. .

.:

.... .

•..... .'' _}'_::"'.. _. ·!:...

tion.

.

;.;"'

IT IS FURTHER 0RDERED .that plaintiff's' Mqtion for Judg_ ment
e
.
•.

·,.~

'

[sic] should , be, ·and _is. he:reby, DENf.~_D>
IT IS FURTHER ORD_ERED

- pl.aintJ'ffs ~ ' mot~o,n -::t.p amend;- filed

that

February 8 I ' 1993 ., should be, ' and i - he_eby, DEN-l-Eo. '
s
r
,-

_DAT- _D this ·p
E

day

of

Fe_ ruary:, l _
b
993 . -

JUDGE

··' :<

.

..;

•'t·

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
~Nn

nTAMTASTNG

~CTTOR.

n.7

22

CLERK'S CERTIF1CATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that a copy of the attached document was mailed to
the following named persons:

Dated: -2 /

7--

•
..f-t-1 }

CAMERON S. BURKE, CLERK

by

;fl//
Deputy Clerk

23