Case ID: f-appx_343/html/0192-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William F. HORNE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-16004.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 11, 2009.
    
    Filed Aug. 17, 2009.
    
      Curtis Clarence Pett, Esquire, James C. Strong, Robert William Metzler, Supervisory, Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    William F. Horne, Carson City, NV, pro se.
    Before: KLEINFELD, M. SMITH, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

William F. Horne appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting the government’s petition to enforce two summonses. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for clear error, United States v. Blackman, 72 F.3d 1418, 1422 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm.

The district court did not clearly err by granting the petition because Horne failed to rebut the government’s showing that the summonses were issued in good faith. See Stewart v. United States, 511 F.3d 1251, 1254-55 (9th Cir.2008) (explaining taxpayer’s “heavy” burden to show an abuse of process or lack of good faith once government makes prima facie showing that the summons was issued in good faith).

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