Ricky Burningham v. Cir
This text of Ricky Burningham v. Cir (Ricky Burningham v. Cir) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RICKY BURNINGHAM, No. 09-70620
Petitioner - Appellant, Tax Ct. No. 7948-07
v. MEMORANDUM * COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from a Decision of the United States Tax Court
Submitted December 14, 2010 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Ricky Burningham appeals pro se from the tax court’s order dismissing his
petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction under 26
U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Abrams v. Comm’r, 814 F.2d 1356,
1357 (9th Cir. 1987) (per curiam). We affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The tax court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction because
Burningham was never issued a Notice of Deficiency or a Notice of Determination.
See 26 U.S.C. §§ 6213(a), 6330(d); Abrams, 814 F.2d at 1357 (holding that a pre-
filing notification letter from the Internal Revenue Service was not a Notice of
Deficiency, and therefore, the tax court had no jurisdiction over the taxpayer’s
petition).
Burningham’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 09-70620
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ricky Burningham v. Cir, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricky-burningham-v-cir-ca9-2010.