Case ID: f-appx_316/html/0681-01.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. David E. LAUGENOUR; Kelly Laugenour; et al., Defendants-Appellants.
    No. 07-16212.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 18, 2009.
    
    Filed March 6, 2009.
    Robert J. Branman, Guy Patrick Jennings, Goud P. Maragani, Bridget Rowan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Kelly Laugenour, Chico, CA, pro se. David E. Laugenour, Auburn, CA, pro se.
    Debra L. Laugenour, Auburn, CA, pro se.
    Before BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

David E. Laugenour and Kelly Laugen-our appeal pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in an action brought by the United States to reduce to judgment income and employment tax assessments against plaintiffs and to foreclose tax liens against certain real property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment to the United States because defendants failed to controvert Certificates of Assessments and Payments demonstrating that the tax assessments were properly made. See Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d 531, 540 (9th Cir.1992) (explaining that Certificates of Assessments and Payments are “probative evidence in and of themselves and, in the absence of contrary evidence, are sufficient to establish that ... assessments were properly made.”).

Appellants’ 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.