1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

PASCAL A. MONS,

Petitioner, 

vs. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

8:23CV243

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED 

MOTION TO DISMISS

Petitioner Pascal Mons filed a petition in this case seeking to quash an IRS summons to 

TD Ameritrade. Filing 1. This case is before the Court on the Unopposed Motion to Dismiss 

Petition filed by the United States. Filing 13. The United States represents that the IRS has now 

withdrawn that summons and argues that because there is no active summons for the Court to 

quash, the Court should dismiss the petition as moot, Filing 13 at 1. 

As another district court in this Circuit has explained,

In Thompson v. United States, No. 06–4572 (PAM/JSM), 2007 WL 773713, at *1 

(D.Minn. Mar. 12, 2007), the petitioner moved to quash forty administrative 

summonses served by the IRS, contending the IRS failed to provide him with a 

reasonable opportunity to provide the IRS with information pursuant to federal law. 

The IRS then formally withdrew the summonses. Id. The court concluded 

“[b]ecause the IRS formally withdrew the summonses, this action is moot.” Id.

Other courts around the country have found similarly. See, e.g., Dame v. United 

States, 643 F.Supp. 533, 534 (S.D.N.Y.1986); Dollar v. United States, No. C84–

978M, 1985 WL 6009, at *1 (W.D.Wash. Mar. 5, 1985); Kearns v. United States, 

580 F.Supp. 8, 9 (S.D.Ohio 1983).

Brinkman v. United States, Inc., ex rel. Internal Revenue Serv., No. 15-MC-67 (JNE/HB), 2015 

WL 9920980, at *2 (D. Minn. Dec. 16, 2015), report and recommendation adopted, No. 15-MC67 (JNE/HB), 2016 WL 355071 (D. Minn. Jan. 28, 2016). That Court found no exceptional 

circumstances such that rendering an opinion where there is no case or controversy would be 

appropriate. Id.

8:23-cv-00243-BCB-CRZ Doc # 14 Filed: 08/10/23 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 43
2

This Court now joins other district courts in this Circuit and elsewhere in the United States 

by concluding that withdrawal of the IRS summons at issue renders Mons’s petition moot. Id.; see 

also Schaeffler v. United States, 696 F. App'x 542 (2d Cir. 2017) (affirming the district court’s 

dismissal of the case as moot where the IRS withdrew the summons and filed a motion to dismiss); 

Gillings v. U.S. I.R.S., 122 F. App'x 360, 361 (9th Cir. 2005) (“Because the IRS withdrew the 

summons, Gillings no longer has a justiciable claim and the district court correctly dismissed 

Gillings's petition.” (citing Hacienda Valley Mobile Estates v. City of Morgan Hill, 353 F.3d 651, 

661 (9th Cir. 2003)). The Court also concludes that there are no exceptional circumstances such 

that rendering an opinion where there is no case or controversy would be appropriate. Id. Mons 

has not attempted to show that there are any such circumstances and instead does not oppose 

dismissal. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition filed by the United States, 

Filing 13, is granted, and this case is dismissed as moot.

Dated this 10th day of August, 2023.

BY THE COURT:  

_________________________

Brian C. Buescher 

United States District Judge

8:23-cv-00243-BCB-CRZ Doc # 14 Filed: 08/10/23 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 44