Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-mc-00007/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-mc-00007-1/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

1

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

YOSHINORI H. T. HIMEL #66194

Assistant U. S. Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 554-2760

Attorneys for Petitioners

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and RO REBECCA AYOTTE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and

REBECCA AYOTTE, Revenue Officer,

Internal Revenue Service,

Petitioners,

v.

JEFFREY FISHER,

Respondent.

2:06-mc-00007-DFL-JFM

MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS

AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE:

I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT

Taxpayer: JEFFREY FISHER

This matter came before the undersigned on April 13, 2006, under the Order to Show

Cause filed February 1, 2006, which, with the verified petition and exhibits, was personally

served on the respondent’s significant other at the residence of both on February 21, 2006. 

Yoshinori H. T. Himel appeared for petitioners, and petitioning Revenue Officer Rebecca

Ayotte was present. Respondent neither filed opposition nor appeared at the hearing.

The Verified Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service Summonses initiating this

proceeding seeks to enforce two administrative summonses in aid of Revenue Officer

Rebecca Ayotte’s investigations: one for tax collection (Exhibit A to the Petition) for years

1996-2003, and one for tax determination for the year 2004 (Exhibit B to the Petition). 

Subject matter jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1340 and 1345, and is found to be

proper. Authorization for the action is under I.R.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a). The Order to

Case 2:06-mc-00007-DFL -JFM Document 9 Filed 06/05/06 Page 1 of 3
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

Show Cause shifted to respondent the burden of rebutting any of the four requirements of

United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).

This court has reviewed the petition and documents in support. Based on the

uncontroverted verification of Revenue Officer Ayotte and the entire record, the court makes

the following findings:

(1) The summonses issued by Revenue Officer Rebecca Ayotte to respondent Jeffrey

Fisher on September 23, 2005, seeking testimony and production of documents and records in

respondent's possession, was in good faith and for a legitimate purpose under I.R.C. § 7602,

that is, to determine financial information to aid in the collection of the duly assessed and

noticed tax liabilities of Jeffrey Fisher for the years 1996-2003, and to determine the tax

liabilities of Jeffrey Fisher for the year 2004.

(2) The information sought is relevant to that purpose.

(3) The information sought is not already in the possession of the Internal Revenue

Service.

(4) The administrative steps required by the Internal Revenue Code have been

followed.

(5) There is no evidence of referral of this case by the Internal Revenue Service to the

Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.

(6) The verified petition and its exhibits made a prima facie showing of satisfaction of

the requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).

(7) The burden shifted to respondent, Jeffrey Fisher, to rebut that prima facie showing.

(8) Despite sufficient personal service, respondent failed to file written opposition,

failed to appear at the hearing and did nothing to rebut the prima facie showing.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the IRS summonses issued to

respondent, Jeffrey Fisher, be enforced, and that respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S.

offices at 4330 Watt Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95821, before Revenue Officer

Rebecca Ayotte or her designated representative, on the twenty-first day after the filing date

of the summons enforcement order, or at a later date and time to be set in writing by the

Case 2:06-mc-00007-DFL -JFM Document 9 Filed 06/05/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Revenue Officer, 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. 

These findings and recommendation are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule

72-304 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of

California. Within ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any

party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a

document should be titled "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and

Recommendations." The District Judge will then review these findings and recommendations

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The parties are advised that failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v.

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: June 5, 2006. 

/fisher.fr

Case 2:06-mc-00007-DFL -JFM Document 9 Filed 06/05/06 Page 3 of 3