Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-mc-00366/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-mc-00366-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Charles Duff
Petitioner
Gary Reg
Respondent
USA
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and No. MISC. S. 04-0366 MCE/JFM 

CHARLES DUFF, Revenue Officer, 

Internal Revenue Service, 

Petitioners, 

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS 

v. OF LAW AND ORDER OF CIVIL 

CONTEMPT 

GARY REG, 

Respondent. 

_______________________________/

This matter came on regularly for hearing on June 13, 2005

at 9:00 a.m. based upon a referral from the Magistrate Judge 

assigned to this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(e)(6)(b). The

Magistrate Judge certified this matter to the District Judge for

trial on the issue of civil contempt. 

Assistant United States Attorney Yoshinori H.T. Himel

(hereafter “AUSA Himel”) appeared on behalf of petitioners United

States of America and Charles Duff. Respondent Gary Reg did not

appear. 

///

///

Case 2:04-mc-00366-MCE -JFM Document 16 Filed 06/15/05 Page 1 of 4
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

Having previously reviewed all of the papers filed in this

case and after hearing the argument presented in open court by

AUSA Yoshinori H.T. Himel, the Court makes the following findings

of fact: 

1. The United States of America and revenue officer

Charles Duff initiated these proceedings against Respondent Gary

Reg (hereafter “Respondent”) by a petition filed on November 10,

2004. 

2. This Court issued an order to show cause to

Respondent regarding tax summons enforcement on December 20, 2004

which set an enforcement hearing date of January 27, 2005. 

3. Respondent was personally served with the Petition

and Order to Show Cause regarding tax summons enforcement. 

4. Respondent did not appear at the tax summons

enforcement hearing on January 27, 2005. 

5. Findings and Recommendations were submitted by the

Magistrate Judge to the District Judge on February 1, 2005. The

Findings and Recommendations recommended enforcement of the tax

summons and ordered Respondent to meet with the Internal Revenue

officer and to produce all records and testimony demanded by the

summons. The time and place for the appointment was to be

determined by the Internal Revenue officer. The District Court

adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations on

February 28, 2005. 

6. The Internal Revenue officer set an appointment for

the Respondent to appear and produce all records for April 4,

2005. 

///

Case 2:04-mc-00366-MCE -JFM Document 16 Filed 06/15/05 Page 2 of 4
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

7. Respondent did not appear at the appointment as ordered

on April 4, 2005. 

8. Respondent failed to comply with the Order

Enforcing Internal Revenue Service Summons issued by this court

on February 28, 2005. 

9. On April 15, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued an

Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt requiring Respondent to file a 

written response regarding his contempt and to appear for a

hearing on May 26, 2005. 

10. Respondent did not file any written response

regarding the Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt and further,

Respondent failed to appear at the hearing on May 26, 2005. 

11. All notices of hearing were properly served on

Respondent. 

12. Neither this Court nor AUSA Himel have received

any communication from Respondent regarding his compliance with

any of the Court orders or his intention to appear at any of the

hearings or produce any documents. 

Based upon the foregoing, this Court finds by clear and

convincing evidence that Respondent, Gary Reg, has failed to

comply with all previous orders of this Court by failing to

provide the requested documentation and/or make the required

appearances, Respondent Reg, is therefore GUILTY of civil

contempt. 

In light of this Court’s determination of civil contempt,

this Court has determined that ordering a compensatory fine or a

coercive fine will not be effective in requiring Respondent to

comply with this Court’s previous orders. This Court has

Case 2:04-mc-00366-MCE -JFM Document 16 Filed 06/15/05 Page 3 of 4
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

4

determined that the only appropriate method of insuring

Respondent’s compliance with this Court’s orders is through

coercive incarceration. 

Accordingly, a no bail bench warrant for the arrest for

Respondent, Gary Reg, will issue forthwith. There shall be no

stays or other delays in the issuance or execution of said bench

warrant. Respondent shall remain incarcerated until such time as

he complies with the previously issued orders of this court. 

Upon full compliance of all orders of this Court, Respondent

shall be released from further incarceration. 

DATE: June 15, 2005

___________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-mc-00366-MCE -JFM Document 16 Filed 06/15/05 Page 4 of 4