Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-03121/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-03121-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 26:7402 IRS: Petition to Enforce IRS Summons

---

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 1

 This motion is also docketed as # 34 in MC-06-063-PHX-SRB.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Sue Taylor,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-3121-PHX-SRB

ORDER

This matter arises on Respondent's "Motion for Response." (docket # 491

)

Respondent seeks information regarding the "charge" against her and the court's jurisdiction.

The motion consists of twelve numbered paragraphs each containing one or more questions

to which Respondent seeks an answer from the Court. For example, Respondent asks, "Was

the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") created by Congress pursuant to Art. I. § 8 (18) of the

Constitution of the United States or did the Secretary of the Treasury create it pursuant to

statutory authority?" (docket # 34 ¶ 2) Respondent poses several other questions regarding

the authority of the IRS to collect taxes. (docket # 34 ¶¶ 1, 2, 3, 11) Respondent's other

questions pertain to the Constitutional provisions and federal statutes which established the

Federal Courts and provide for the appointment of District Judges and Magistrate Judges.

(docket # 34 ¶¶ 4-10, 12) 

Case 2:06-cv-03121-SRB Document 53 Filed 03/02/07 Page 1 of 2
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

- 2 -

Respondent's pleading is not a proper motion. Rather, the pleading is in the nature

of interrogatories seeking answers to various questions from the Court. Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 33(a) provides that "any party may serve upon any other party written

interrogatories . . . ." The Court is not a party to this action. Accordingly, Respondent's

interrogatories are improper. Moreover, Respondent could obtain the answers to her

questions by reviewing the statutes and constitutional provisions to which she refers in her

pleading. 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent's "Motion for Response" (docket # 49

in CV-06-3121-PHX-SRB, also docketed as # 34 in MC-06-063-PHX-SRB.) is DENIED.

DATED this 1st day of March, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-03121-SRB Document 53 Filed 03/02/07 Page 2 of 2