United States of America v. Smith
ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 15 ; granting petition to enforce IRS summons 1 ; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, rmw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 1:16-mc-98
HON. JANET T. NEFF
MONICA DIANE SMITH,
This is a proceeding brought pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7604 to enforce an administrative
summons issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The matter was referred to the Magistrate
Judge, who issued a Corrected Report and Recommendation on April 21, 2017, recommending that
this Court grant the petition to enforce IRS summons, and order that Respondent comply completely
with the summons. The Report and Recommendation was duly served on the parties. No objections
have been filed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Corrected Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 15)
is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service
Summons (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Monica Diane Smith shall comply
completely with the IRS summons (ECF No. 1-2), including: 1) Respondent Smith shall produce
to Revenue Officer Kristyn Naziri the ordered information and documentation in Respondent
Smith’s possession or control on or before May 10, 2017, at 10:00 a.m.; 2) Respondent Smith shall
appear before Ms. Naziri at the place indicated on the summons on May 10, 2017, at 10:00 a.m.; and
3) Respondent Smith shall fully comply with all directions and instructions in the summons on or
before May 10, 2017.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Smith’s failure to comply with the Court’s
order may result in sanctions, including contempt of court.
Dated: May 8, 2017
/s/ Janet T. Neff
JANET T. NEFF
United States District Judge
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?