Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03612/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03612-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 26:7422 IRS: Refund Taxes

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PASSIVE LLC et al.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant. /

No. C 09-3612 CRB

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

DISMISS FOR LACK OF

JURISDICTION

Now before this court is the Government’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction. Plaintiffs ask this court in their Complaint “to order processing of refund

in the amount specified in the IRS filing . . . .” Comp. ¶ 5. Indeed, this Court would have

subject matter jurisdiction in certain circumstance over a law suit to obtain an IRS tax refund. 

However, the Government’s sovereign immunity has only been waived with certain

conditions. For instance, the United States Code provides that “[n]o suit or proceeding shall

be maintained in any court for the recovery of any internal revenue tax alleged to have been

erroneously or illegally assessed or collected . . . until a claim for refund or credit has been

duly filed with the Secretary. . . . .” 26 U.S.C. § 7422. Plaintiffs do not allege that they filed

such a claim. Indeed, they do not allege that they paid tax on any particular assessment such

that a refund would be possible. One cannot refund a tax payment that has never been paid. 

See Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 177 (1960) (holding that a suit for a tax refund

Case 3:09-cv-03612-CRB Document 21 Filed 01/19/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\CRBALL\2009\3612\Order Dismissing Case.wpd 2

“requires full payment of the assessment before an income tax refund suit can be maintained

in a Federal District Court.”). 

At the hearing, Plaintiffs did not suggest that they did, in fact, pay an assessment. 

Indeed, Plaintiffs seemed to concede at the hearing that their cause of action is not truly an

action for a tax refund. If that is the case, then Plaintiff must establish some different vehicle

for waiver of sovereign immunity. “The party who sues the United States bears the burden

of pointing to such an unequivocal waiver of immunity.” Holloman v. Watt, 708 F.2d 1399

(9th Cir. 1983). Because Plaintiffs have failed to present sufficient evidence of this Court’s

jurisdiction over the dispute, this case is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 19, 2010 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-03612-CRB Document 21 Filed 01/19/10 Page 2 of 2