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

RESPONSE TO OPPOSITON TO MOTION TO DISMISS - 1 

JEHOADDAN L. WILSON

PRO SE

430 Iron Club Drive 

Brentwood, CA 94513 

PHONE (916) 217-9662 | FAX (888) 391-5349 

EMAIL jehoaddanwilson@ymail.com 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

JEHOADDAN L. WILSON, 

Defendant

Case No.: CR-17-0028 JST

RESPONSE TO OPPOSITON TO MOTION 

TO DISMISS

Date: April 2, 2021 

Time: 9:30 A.M. 

Judge: Hon. Jon. S. Tigar 

 Points and Authorities

 Statement of the Case

The defense filed a Motion to Dismiss and the Government have filed Opposition. The 

defense replies to the Government’s arguments in this brief. 

 Argument 

1. Basis for Relief

A defendant may bring a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal

Procedure 12(b)(3)(B)(v) and Rule 7(c)(1). The Indictment alleges four causes of action: (i) 
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

RESPONSE TO OPPOSITON TO MOTION TO DISMISS - 2

18:287 Filing false claims (6 counts); (ii) 18:286 Conspiracy to file false claims; 18:1343 (iii) 

Wire fraud (6 counts); and (iv) 18:1028A Aggravated identity theft (6 counts). 

Defendant denies all the allege claims in the indictment on the basis of failure to state a 

claim not because the indictment is not sufficient but because the indictment alleges charges that 

are not “definite.” Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 7(c)(1) requires that an indictment be 

“plain, concise and definite [...].” Meaning the indictment must include all three categories 

which each are defined separately but all three must be met. The basis and concentration herein

is on the category of “definite.” “Definite” according to https://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/definite#synonyms defines “definite” as, (i) free of all ambiguity, 

uncertainty, or obscurity, (ii) Unquestionable, decided (iii) typically designating an identified or 

immediately identifiable person or thing. 

Understanding the definition of “definite” as it pertains to the requirements of the 

indictment is “essential” because we can now visit why the “definite” requirement does not exist. 

It is in the non-existence of the requirement that the Government has proven conduct which is 

not actually criminal.

A motion to dismiss an indictment can be determined before trial “if it involves 

questions of law rather than fact.” United States v. Shortt Accountancy Corp., 785 F.2d 1448, 

1452 (9th Cir. 1986). The “definite” category requires the indictment to be unquestionable. If 

questions of law arise the indictment is not definite. The question of law that arise is, is the 

Internal Revenue Service a “civil service?” Section 287 of title 18 states, “Whoever makes or 

presents to any person of officer in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States [....].” 

The Government must state a claim that is plain, concise, and definite. Is the Internal Revenue 

Service a Military, Naval or Civil service of the United States? We can definitely say the 
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

RESPONSE TO OPPOSITON TO MOTION TO DISMISS - 3 

Internal Revenue Service is neither a Naval nor Military Service of the United States. The 

question rest in the definition of “civil service.” How does the law define “civil service?” As 

defined in 5 U.S.C. § 2101. Civil service, armed forces; unformed services (1) the “civil service” 

consists of all appointive positions in the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the 

Government of the United States, except positions in the uniformed services. The key words are

“appointive positions.” The next legal question is, does the Internal Revenue Service have 

“appointive positions?” According to Reorganization Plans in Title 5-Appendix, Reorganization 

Plan No. 1 of 1952 section 1. Abolition of Exiting Offices list all the abolished offices of the 

Bureau of Internal Revenue. President Harry S. Truman states in his message on January 14, 

1952 that “...Bureau of Internal Revenue which plan No. 1 removes is the archaic statutory 

office of collector of internal revenue. Since the collectors are not appointed and cannot be 

removed by the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue or the Secretary of the Treasury [....].” 

President Truman clarified that the Internal Revenue Service was removed from office. The 

Internal revenue service does not have the United States Government as stakeholder or 

stockholder. The control of the Internal Revenue is not controlled by the United States 

Government because the U.S. Government is separate. I attached the entire Reorganization Plan 

No.1 of 1952 and 5 U.S.C § 2101 documents. President Truman’s Reorganization Plan No.1 of 

1952 clarifies that the “collectors” are not appointed. We all know Internal Revenue is 

responsible for collecting revenue. However, President Truman made is clear their positions are 

“not appointed.” 

The Opposition attempted to provide a possible legal theory as to alleged crimes but 

failed because Internal Revenue Service is not an appointed position as defined in 5 U.S.C. § 

2101. The “definite” requirement has not been met. Therefore, failing to state a claim that 
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

RESPONSE TO OPPOSITON TO MOTION TO DISMISS - 4 

would according to the definition of “definite” immediately identifiable person or thing.” The 

Internal Revenue Service cannot be identified as a civil service. All charges should be 

dismissed to prevent further damage of defendant’s Fifth Amendment Right of the U.S. 

Constitution which provides protection of life, liberty, and property, and due process of law. The 

indictment failed in providing all three requirements of plain, concise, and definite. The 

“definite” category is missing. Illustrating a failed requirement and failed claim to state an 

offense. The Internal Revenue is unidentifiable in all alleged charges. 

ll. The Court Should Not Impose a Rule 12(c) Deadline

The court understands the defendant is experiencing mental health issues in the wake of

Covid-19 disaster to make matters worst and more challenging to defend herself with such a 

strict deadline presents an unfair advantage. The defendant objects to request by opposition and 

request no deadline for court law and public law libraries are closed and not renting material 

needed to do effective research. The effective assistance of counsel right of the Sixth 

Amendment of the U.S. Constitution would be violated due to Covid-19 limitations and mental 

illness, making is already unfair for defendant to keep up with the vague language of the law. 

 Conclusion 

For the foregoing reasons, the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted with 

prejudice and all charges should be dismissed. 

Date: March 19, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Jehoaddan L. Wilson 

Pro Se 
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

RESPONSE TO OPPOSITON TO MOTION TO DISMISS - 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on March 19, 2021, a true copy of the foregoing MOTION 

TO DISMISS was filed electronically with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which 

will send a notification of such filing to the following: 

DAVID L. ANDERSON (CABN 149604)

United States Attorney

HALLIE HOFFMAN (CABN 210020)

Chief, Criminal Division

ROBERT DAVID REES (CABN 229441)

ALEXIS J. LOEB (CABN 269895) 

Assistant United States Attorney’s Office

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 

San Francisco, California 94102-3495 

Telephone: (415) 436-7200 

FAX: (415) 436-7234 

Email: robert.rees@usdoj.gov 
3/19/2021

2/3

I am confident that the Congress and the public are as deeply and earnestly concerned as I am that the public business be conducted entirely upon a

basis of fairness, integrity, and efficiency. I therefore hope that the Congress will give speedy approval to Reorganization Plan No. 1, in order that we

may move ahead rapidly in to achieving the reorganization of the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

The task of collecting the internal revenue has expanded enormously within the past decade. This expansion has been occasioned by the necessary

additional taxation brought on by World War II and essential post-war programs. In fiscal year 1940, tax collections made by the Bureau of Internal

Revenue were slightly over 51/3 billions of dollars; in 1951, they totaled almost 501⁄2 billions. In 1940, 19 million tax returns were filed; in 1951, 82

million. In 1940, there were 22,000 employees working for the Bureau; in 1951, there were 57,000.

Throughout this tremendous growth, the structure of the revenue-collecting organization has remained substantially unchanged. The present field

structure of the Bureau of Internal Revenue is comprised of more than 200 field offices which report directly to Washington. Those 200 offices carry

out their functions through more than 2,000 suboffices and posts of duty throughout the country. The Washington office now provides operating

supervision, guidance, and control over the principal field offices through 10 separate divisions, thus further adding to the complexities of

administration.

Since the end of World War II, many procedural improvements have been made in the Bureau's operations. The use of automatic machines has been

greatly increased. The handling of cases has been simplified. One major advance is represented by the recently completed arrangements to expedite

criminal prosecutions in tax-fraud cases. In these cases, field representatives of the Bureau of Internal Revenue will make recommendations for

criminal prosecutions directly to the Department of Justice. These procedural changes have increased the Bureau's efficiency and have made it possible

for the Bureau to carry its enormously increased workload. However, improvements in procedure cannot meet the need for organizational changes.

Part of the authority necessary to make a comprehensive reorganization was provided in Reorganization Plan No. 26 of 1950, which was one of several

uniform plans giving department heads fuller authority over internal organizations throughout their departments. The studies of the Secretary of the

Treasury have culminated since that time in a plan for extensive reorganization and modernization of the Bureau. However, his existing authority is not

broad enough to permit him to effectuate all of the basic features of the plan he has developed.

The principal barrier to effective organization and administration of the Bureau of Internal Revenue which plan No. 1 removes is the archaic statutory

office of collector of internal revenue. Since the collectors are not appointed and cannot be removed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue or the

Secretary of the Treasury and since the collectors must accommodate themselves to local political situations, they are not fully responsive to the

control of their superiors in the Treasury Department. Residence requirements prevent moving a collector from one collection district to another, either

to promote impartiality and fairness or to advance collectors to more important positions. Uncertainties of tenure add to the difficulty of attracting to

such offices persons who are well versed in the intricacies of the revenue laws and possessed of broadgaged administrative ability.

It is appropriate and desirable that major political offices in the executive branch of the Government be filled by persons who are appointed by the

President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. On the other hand, the technical nature of much of the Government's work today makes it

equally appropriate and desirable that positions of other types be in the professional career service. The administration of our internal-revenue laws at

the local level calls for positions in the latter category.

Instead of the present organization built around the offices of politically appointed collectors of internal revenue, plan No. 1 will make it possible for

the Secretary of the Treasury to establish not to exceed 25 district offices. Each of these offices will be headed by a district commissioner who will be

responsible to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and will have full responsibility for administering all internal-revenue activities within a

designated area. In addition, all essential collection, enforcement, and appellate functions can be provided for in each local area and under one roof so

far as is practicable. It is not proposed to discontinue any essential facilities which now exist in any local areas. Rather, the facilities will be extended

and the service to taxpayers improved. These new arrangements should make it possible for the individual taxpayer to conduct his business with the

Bureau much more conveniently and expeditiously.

In addition to making possible greatly improved service to the taxpayer, the establishment of the district offices will provide opportunity in the field

service of the Bureau of Internal Revenue for the development of high-caliber administrators with experience in all phases of revenue administration.

These offices will be the backbone of a modern, streamlined pattern of organization and operations with clear and direct channels of responsibility and

supervision from the lowest field office to the Commissioner, and through him to the Secretary of the Treasury. The creation of this new framework of

district offices is a necessary step in carrying out the overall reorganization of the Bureau.

Plan No. 1 also makes it possible to provide a new framework of supervisory offices in the headquarters of the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Under plan

No. 1, the offices of Deputy Commissioner, Special Deputy Commissioner, and Assistant Commissioner are abolished. Three Assistant

Commissioners, all in the classified civil service, are authorized, and will be available, to perform such functions as may be assigned to them. The

intention of the Secretary of the Treasury under the comprehensive reorganization is to utilize one Assistant Commissioner to assist the Commissioner

of Internal Revenue in supervising the operations of the district offices, another Assistant Commissioner to aid in the preparation of technical rulings

and decisions, and the third Assistant Commissioner to supervise for the Commissioner the inspection activities of the Bureau.

Two additional advantages will be obtained when the reorganization around this new framework is completed.

First, the strong inspection service which the Secretary is establishing will keep the work of the Bureau under close and continuous observation.

Working under the direct control of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, it will be responsible for promptly detecting and investigating any

irregularities.

Second, the new pattern of organization will strengthen and clarify lines of responsibility throughout the Bureau, thus simplifying and making more

effective and uniform the management control of the organization. This is essential in any effort to provide our principal revenue collection agency the

best possible administration.

In order to eliminate Presidential appointment and senatorial confirmation with respect to the Assistant General Counsel for the Bureau of Internal

Revenue, and in order to provide a method of appointment comparable to that obtaining in the case of other assistant general counsel of the

Department of the Treasury, plan No. 1 abolishes that office and provides in lieu thereof a new office of Assistant General Counsel with appointment

under the classified civil service.
3/19/2021

1/3

REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 1 OF 1952

Effective Mar. 14, 1952, 17 F.R. 2243, 66 Stat. 823, as amended June 28, 1955, ch. 189, §12(c)(19), 69 Stat. 182; Sept. 13, 1982, Pub. L. 97–258,

§5(b), 96 Stat. 1068, 1085

Prepared by the President and transmitted to the Senate and the House of Representatives in Congress assembled, January 14, 1952, pursuant to the

provisions of the Reorganization Act of 1949, approved June 20, 1949 [see 5 U.S.C. 901 et seq.].

BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Section 1. Abolition of Existing Offices

There are abolished the offices of Assistant Commissioner, Special Deputy Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Assistant General Counsel for the

Bureau of Internal Revenue, Collector, and Deputy Collector, provided for in sections 3905, 3910, 3915, 3931, 3941, and 3990, respectively, of the

Internal Revenue Code [of 1939]. The provisions of the foregoing sentence shall become effective with respect to each office abolished thereby at such

time as the Secretary of the Treasury shall specify, but in no event later than December 1, 1952. The Secretary of the Treasury shall make such

provisions as he shall deem necessary respecting the winding up of the affairs of any officer whose office is abolished by the provisions of this section.

Sec. 2. Establishment of New Offices

(a) New offices are hereby established in the Bureau of Internal Revenue as follows: (1) three offices each of which shall have the title of "Assistant

Commissioner of Internal Revenue"; (2) so many offices, not in excess of 25 existing at any one time, as the Secretary of the Treasury shall from time

to time determine, each of which shall have the title of "District Commissioner of Internal Revenue"; and (3) so many other offices, not in excess of 70

existing at any one time, and with such title or titles, as the Secretary of the Treasury shall from time to time determine.

(b) [Repealed. Pub. L. 97–258, §5(b), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1068, 1085. Subsection established a new and additional office of Assistant General

Counsel. See 31 U.S.C. 301.]

Sec. 3. Appointment and Compensation

Each assistant commissioner and district commissioner, the assistant general counsel, and each other officer provided for in section 2 of this

reorganization plan shall be appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury under the classified civil service and shall receive compensation which shall be

fixed from time to time pursuant to the classification laws, as now or hereafter amended. (As amended Act June 28, 1955, ch. 189, §12(c)(19), 69 Stat.

182).

Sec. 4. Transfer of Functions

There are transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury the functions, if any, that have been vested by statute in officers, agencies, or employees of the

Bureau of Internal Revenue of the Department of the Treasury since the effective date of Reorganization Plan Numbered 26 of 1950 (15 F.R. 4935).

Message of the President

To the Congress of the United States:

I transmit herewith Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1952, prepared in accordance with the Reorganization Act of 1949 and providing for reorganizations

in the Bureau of Internal Revenue of the Department of the Treasury.

A comprehensive reorganization of that Bureau is necessary both to increase the efficiency of its operations and to provide better machinery for

assuring honest and impartial administration of the internal revenue laws. The reorganization plan transmitted with this message is essential to

accomplish the basic changes in the structure of the Bureau of Internal Revenue which are necessary for the kind of comprehensive reorganization that

is now required.

By bringing additional personnel in the Bureau of Internal Revenue under the merit system, Reorganization Plan No. 1 likewise removes what the

Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government described as "one of the chief handicaps to effective organization of the

Department * * *."

It is my determination to maintain the highest standards of integrity and efficiency in the Federal service. While those standards have been observed

faithfully by all but a relatively few public servants, the betrayal of their trust by those few demands the strongest corrective action.

The most vigorous efforts are being and will continue to be made to expose and punish every Government employee who misuses his official position.

But we must do even more than this. We must correct every defect in organization that contributes to inefficient management and thus affords the

opportunity for improper conduct.

The thorough reorganization of the Bureau of Internal Revenue which I propose will be of great help in accomplishing all of these ends. It is an

integral part of a program to prevent improper conduct in public service, to protect the Government from insidious influence peddlers and favor

seekers, to expose and punish wrong-doers, and to improve the management and efficiency of the executive branch.
3/19/2021

3/3

The success of the reorganization of the Bureau of Internal Revenue will to a considerable extent depend upon the ability to attract the best qualified

persons to the key positions throughout the Bureau. In order to do so, it is necessary to make provision for more adequate salaries for such key

positions. Plan No. 1 establishes in the Bureau of Internal Revenue a maximum of 70 offices with titles determined by the Secretary of the Treasury.

Those offices are in addition to the offices with specific titles also provided for in plan No. 1 and to any positions established under other authority

vested in the Department of the Treasury. The compensation of these officials will be fixed under the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, but

without regard to the numerical limitations on positions set forth in section 505 of that act. This provision will enable the Chairman of the Civil Service

Commission, or the President, as the case may be, to fix rates of pay for those offices in excess of the rates established in the Classification Act of 1949

for grade GS–15 whenever the standards of the classification laws so permit.

All organizational changes under plan No. 1 will be put into effect as soon as it is possible to do so without disrupting the continued collection of

revenue. Plan No. 1 will in any event be effective in its entirety no later than December 1, 1952.

The taking effect of the reorganizations provided for in Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1952 will make possible many benefits in improved organization

and operations which may be expected to produce substantial savings in future years. Those savings should not be expected to be reflected in an

immediate reduction in expenditure by the Bureau of Internal Revenue but in an improved service to the public and a more efficient collection of

revenue.

It should be emphasized that abolition by plan No. 1 of the offices of collectors and others will in no way prejudice any right or potential right of any

taxpayer. The abolition of offices by plan No. 1 will not abolish any rights, privileges, powers, duties, immunities, liabilities, obligations, or other

attributes of those offices except as they relate to matters of appointment, tenure, and compensation inconsistent with plan No. 1. Under the

Reorganization Act of 1949, all of these attributes of office will attach to the office to which the functions of the abolished office are delegated by the

Secretary of the Treasury.

After investigation, I have found and hereby declare that each reorganization included in Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1952 is necessary to accomplish

one or more of the purposes set forth in section 2(a) of the Reorganization Act of 1949.

I have found and hereby declare that it is necessary to include in the accompanying Reorganization Plan No. 1, by reason of reorganizations made

thereby, provisions for the appointment and compensation of the officers specified therein. The rates of compensation fixed for these officers are not in

excess of those which I have found to prevail in respect of comparable officers in the executive branch.

I cannot emphasize too strongly the importance which should be attached to the reorganization plan that I am now transmitting to the Congress. The

fair and efficient administration of the Federal internal-revenue laws is of vital concern to every citizen. All of us have a right to insist that the Bureau

of Internal Revenue be provided with the finest organization that can be devised. All of us are entitled to have that organization manned by personnel

who get their jobs and keep them solely because of their own integrity and competence. This reorganization plan will be a major step in achieving

those objectives.

Harry S. Truman. 

The White House, January 14, 1952.