Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-02358/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-02358-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 26:7403 Suit to Enforce Federal Tax Lien

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Robert F. Smith, Sr., 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV10-2358 PHX DGC

ORDER

Pro se Defendant Robert F. Smith, Sr. moves to dismiss Plaintiff United States’ claim

for a tax judgment. Doc. 14. Plaintiff opposes (Docs. 15, 16), and Defendant has not filed

a reply. The motion is ripe, and the parties have not requested oral argument. For the

reasons below, the Court will deny the motion.

Defendant argues that this action was commenced in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 7401

and 7403 because the requisite approval of the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney

General or his delegate does not or may not exist. See Doc. 14. To the extent the procedural

requirements of §§ 7401 and 7403 are jurisdictional, the action may be dismissed if a

defendant brings “evidence to counter the normal presumption of regularity that attaches to

the actions of public officers.” See Palmer v. U.S. Internal Revenue Serv., 116 F.3d 1309,

1311 (9th Cir. 1997). Defendant proffers that he sent letters to six government officials and

agencies requesting proof of authorization, and that no one has responded. Doc. 14 at 3-6.

Such silence certainly does not satisfy Defendant’s burden of producing evidence to counter

the presumption of regularity in this case.

Case 2:10-cv-02358-DGC Document 19 Filed 03/22/11 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 -

In addition, Plaintiff has presented a letter from the Department of the Treasury to the

Department of Justice stating that action to collect against Defendant’s debt should proceed,

and that although Defendant does not possess significant assets he is “currently involved in

a wrongful death lawsuit and may recover damages sufficient to pay off” his debt to the

United States. Doc. 15-2. Plaintiff also presented an affidavit from Plaintiff’s counsel

asserting that Department of Justice files contain a letter “indicating that the Attorney

General has directed the action to be commenced” (Doc. 15-1 at 2) and has attached the letter

as an exhibit (Doc. 15-7). Defendant has not filed a reply and proffers no evidence to rebut

the government’s exhibits.

Defendant has failed to meet his burden of rebutting the presumption of regularity

surrounding the commencement of this action.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 14) is denied.

DATED this 22nd day of March, 2011.

Case 2:10-cv-02358-DGC Document 19 Filed 03/22/11 Page 2 of 2