Case ID: f-appx_277/html/0690-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Andy ATIGHI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 06-74127.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 22, 2008.
    
    Filed May 6, 2008.
    Andy Atighi, Oxnard, CA, pro se.
    Donald L. Korb, Acting Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service, Mary R. Pelletier, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Lynne L. Glasser, Teresa E. McLaughlin, Esq., Eileen J. O’Con-nor, Esq., for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges,
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Andy Atighi appeals pro se from the tax court’s order granting the Commissioner’s motion for entry of decision and upholding a federal income tax deficiency for 2002. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion. Doi v. Halekulani Corp., 276 F.3d 1131, 1136 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

The tax court did not abuse its discretion because the record confirms that, prior to trial, the parties settled Atighi’s action challenging the deficiency determination, and Atighi paid the assessed deficiency. See Callie v. Near, 829 F.2d 888, 890 (9th Cir.1987) (explaining that tax court has equitable power to enforce summarily an agreement to settle a case pending before it).

Atighi’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.