Devona Ferrel v. Ann Brown, Seattle District Director of Internal Revenue Timothy A. Towns, Chief, Collection Branch

40 F.3d 1049, 94 Daily Journal DAR 16632, 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8920, 74 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 7036, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 33276, 1994 WL 661616

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: November 25, 1994
• Docket: 93-36106
• Status: Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We have carefully reviewed the record and the district court’s decision. We affirm for the reasons fully explicated in the district court’s excellent published opinion —Ferrel v. Brown, 847 F.Supp. 1524 (W.D.Wash.1993). We adopt that opinion as our own.

Ferrel does raise one issue that was mentioned in her complaint but was not decided in the district court’s opinion. She asserts that the levy on her account violated 26 U.S.C. § 6331(f) because it was uneconomical. However, that section has no relevance to this case because “§ 6331 ... does not ‘implicate the rights of third parties’....” United States v. National Bank of Commerce, 472 U.S. 713, 731, 105 S.Ct. 2919, 2930, 86 L.Ed.2d 565 (1985) (citation omitted). 1

AFFIRMED.

1 . Appellant’s motion to strike appellees' submission under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(j) and appellees’ motion to file a response to appellant’s reply brief are denied.