Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-mc-00075/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-mc-00075-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
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

Page 1

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

YOSHINORI H. T. HIMEL #66194

Assistant United States Attorney

Eastern District of California

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, California 95814-2322

Telephone: (916) 554-2760

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and

ALEX ALARCON, JR., Revenue

Officer, Internal Revenue Service,

Petitioners,

v.

MARTIN FLORES,

Respondent.

2:09-mc-00075-MCE-EFB

ORDER ADOPTING

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND

ENFORCING I.R.S. SUMMONS

Taxpayer: MR. MARTIN FLORES

and MRS. EDUVIJES A. FLORES 

 

The United States and Revenue Officer Alex Alarcon, Jr., here petition for

enforcement of an I.R.S. summons. The matter was placed before United States

Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan under 28 U.S.C. § 636 et seq. and Local Rule 73-

302. On August 21, 2009, Judge Brennan issued an Order to Show Cause, ordering the

respondent, Martin Flores, to show cause why the I.R.S. summons issued to him on May

6, 2009, should not be enforced. The Petition, Points and Authorities, and Order to Show

Cause were effectively served upon the respondent. Respondent did not file an

opposition to enforcement under paragraph on page 3 of the Order to Show Cause.

Judge Brennan presided at the show-cause hearing on December 2, 2009, at which

respondent failed to appear. On December 18, 2009, Judge Brennan filed Findings and

Case 2:09-mc-00075-MCE -EFB Document 11 Filed 01/07/10 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

Page 2

Recommendations, finding that the requirements for summons enforcement had been

satisfied and recommending that the summons be enforced. Neither side filed objections

to the Magistrate Judge's findings and recommendations.

I have reviewed the entire record de novo under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and

Local Rule 72-304. I am satisfied that the Magistrate Judge's findings and

recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis, and that the

requested and unopposed summons enforcement should be granted. Accordingly, it is

hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations Re: I.R.S. Summons

Enforcement, filed December 18, 2009, are ADOPTED IN FULL.

2. The I.R.S. summons issued to respondent, Martin Flores, is ENFORCED.

3. Respondent, Martin Flores, is ORDERED to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 4330

Watt Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95821, before Revenue Officer Alex Alarcon, Jr.,

or his designated representative, within 21 days of the issuance of this order, or at an

alternate time and date to be set by Revenue Officer Alarcon, then and there to be sworn,

to give testimony, and to produce for examining and copying the books, checks, records,

papers and other data demanded by the summons, the examination to continue from day

to day until completed.

It is SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 6, 2010

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:09-mc-00075-MCE -EFB Document 11 Filed 01/07/10 Page 2 of 2