Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-01145/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-01145-2/pdf.json

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

---

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

1 The court notes, however, that mailing a copy of the motion and declaration to the IRS's

tax collection office is not sufficient. A lawsuit against the IRS is a lawsuit against the United States.

E.g., Husek v. I.R.S. of U.S., 778 F. Supp. 598, 601 (N.D.N.Y. 1991). The Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure dictate the procedure for suing the United States. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i). The court

recommends that Mr. Torre consider the court's Pro Se Handbook for help, which is available free on

the court's website. See HANDBOOK FOR LITIGANTS WITHOUT A LAWYER, available at:

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/

ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

No. C-07-01545 RMW

TSF

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-filed: 4/21/08 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ROBERT CARMELO TORRE

Plaintiff,

v.

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,

Defendant.

No. C-08-01145 RMW

ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY MOTION

FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

[Re Docket No. 12]

On March 31, 2008, this court denied plaintiff Robert Carmelo Torre's emergency motion to

remove a tax levy on his social security payment and to remove a freeze placed on his personal bank

account. See Docket No. 12. Mr. Torre moves again asking this court to remove the levies because

of the financial distress the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") is causing him.

The court appreciates that Mr. Torre heeded the court's prior guidance by providing a sworn

declaration and stating the measures he has taken to provide notice to the defendant.1

Case 5:08-cv-01145-RMW Document 14 Filed 04/21/08 Page 1 of 3
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 2 The Supreme Court's recent opinions are available for free on-line at:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07slipopinion.html.

ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

No. C-07-01545 RMW

TSF 2

This court, however, has very limited jurisdiction to hear suits "for the purpose of restraining

the assessment or collection of any tax." 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a). This statute, referred to as the AntiInjunction Act, uses "sweeping terms." Alexander v. "Americans United'' Inc. 416 U.S. 752, 760

(1974). " The object of [section] 7421(a) is to withdraw jurisdiction from the state and federal

courts to entertain suits seeking injunctions prohibiting the collection of federal taxes." Enochs v.

Williams Packing & Nav. Co., 370 U.S. 1, 5 (1964). The Supreme Court very recently held that a

large coal mining company that had been unconstitutionally taxed had to comply with the

administrative scheme of seeking a refund rather than suing in court for an injunction. United States

v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., --- S.Ct. ----, 2008 WL 1721530, at *6 (2008).2 The Court's

opinion helpfully lays out an overview of the administrative scheme for contesting a tax dispute with

the IRS. See id. at *4-*5. In doing so, the Court highlighted a companion statute to the one that

limits this court's ability to issue an injunction is section 7422(a), which the Clintwood Elkhorn court

paraphrased as stating that:

No 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, or of any penalty claimed to have been collected without authority, or of

any sum alleged to have been excessive or in any manner wrongfully collected, until

a claim for refund or credit has been duly filed with the [IRS].

Id. at *3. Mr. Torre's complaint does not indicate that he has filed a claim with the IRS or attempted

to use the mandatory administrative process for resolving tax disputes.

Because section 7421(a) bars this court from enjoining the IRS's collection efforts (and

because section 7422(a) strongly suggests that Mr. Torre's suit must be dismissed), the court cannot

issue Mr. Torre's requested emergency relief. The application is therefore denied.

DATED: 4/21/2008 

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:08-cv-01145-RMW Document 14 Filed 04/21/08 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

No. C-07-01545 RMW

TSF 3

Notice of this document was mailed to:

Plaintiff:

Robert Carmelo Torre 

POB 307 

Santa Cruz, CA 95061 

Counsel for Defendants:

(No appearance)

Dated: 4/21/2008 TSF

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:08-cv-01145-RMW Document 14 Filed 04/21/08 Page 3 of 3