Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_07-cv-00875/USCOURTS-ared-4_07-cv-00875-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 26:7401 IRS: Tax Liability

---

1

Doc. No. 3. Defenant’s Motion reads:

The complaint #4-07-CV-00875 must be dismissed for the following: (F)

failed to state a valid claim upon which relief can be granted. The claim

stated is a nonconsensual lien and is not on record; (G) the U.S. Attorney

failed to disclose which United States he represents, the several states or the

U.S. Corporation located in the District of Columbia; (H) there is not a

Justice Department referral in the docket; (I) there is no testimony, no proof

of evidence, or proof of claim that the various documents are invalid or

void; (J) jurisdiction does not extend to Arkansas state; (K) Plaintiff has

failed to identify the accuser in the Complaint. Some unnamed chief

counsel; (L) remedy was provided in each affidavit to Plaintiff and by

Plaintiff’s failure to respond nihil dicit established his unconditional

acceptance; (M) Plaintiff failed to show remedy for unregistered foreign

agents; and (N) Leroy Muncy is not a federal privilege employee and is not

involved in the manufacture and sell of alcohol, tobacco, or firearms.

2

Huelsman v. Civic Center Corp., 873 F.2d 1171, 1174 (8th Cir. 1989) (citation omitted).

3

Doc. No. 1.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF

v. 4:07CV00875-WRW

LEROY MUNCY DEFENDANT

ORDER

Pending is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 3). Plaintiff has responded (Doc. No. 12).

For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.

Even though Defendant names many reasons why he believes this case should be dismissed,1

 he

did not specify under which provision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure he makes his motion. It

appears that Defendant is basing his motion solely on Rule 12(b)(6) -- failure to state a claim upon which

relief can be granted. Dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted should be

“granted sparingly and with caution.”2

 Plaintiff’s Complaint identifies the parties, the basis for

jurisdiction, the basis for venue, and the claim.3

 The arguments Defendant raises in his Motion to Dismiss

Case 4:07-cv-00875-BSM Document 13 Filed 12/07/07 Page 1 of 2
do not show that Plaintiff’s claim is one upon which relief cannot be granted. Accordingly, I find that

dismissal of this case is inappropriate. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 13) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of December, 2007 (Pearl Harbor Day). 

 /s/Wm. R. Wilson, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:07-cv-00875-BSM Document 13 Filed 12/07/07 Page 2 of 2