Bharose v. United States

210 F. App'x 713
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided December 12, 2006·No. No. 05-17015·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Ram Bharose (also known as Raghvendra Singh) appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his petition to quash an IRS summons directing a third party to produce records relating to the tax liabilities of Raghvendra Singh and another individual. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Ip v. United States, 205 F.3d 1168, 1171 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Bharose’s petition for lack of jurisdiction because he failed to initiate, by certified or registered mail, and within twenty days after the summons was mailed, the proceeding to quash, and also failed to mail a copy of his petition to the summoned financial institution. See 26 U.S.C. § 7609(b)(2)(B); Ponsford v. US, 771 F.2d 1305, 1309 (9th Cir.1985) (holding that the procedural requirements of section 7609(b) are jurisdictional).

Bharose’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bharose v. United States, 210 F. App'x 713 (9th Cir. 2006).

210 F. App'x 713 (Bharose v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sheila Ann Ip v. United States of America Martin Lum
205 F.3d 1168 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)