1The facts are drawn from the affidavits of Andrea A. Kafka

and Rai Shepardson, the certificates of “assessments, payments

and other specified matters,” and the Requests for Admissions

which defendant is deemed to have admitted.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

USA

v. Civil No. 07-cv-398-JM

Henry W. McElroy, Jr.

Digital Federal Credit Union

O R D E R

The plaintiff moves for partial summary judgment. 

Defendant’s response can most charitably be described as bizarre

nonsense. For the reasons set forth in this order, plaintiff is

granted partial summary judgment in the amount of $52,313.59,

plus statutory additions and interest accruing from January 1,

2009.

I. Factual Background1

Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 36(a)(3), requests

for admissions are deemed admitted unless answered or

specifically objected to within thirty (30) days of service. The

Case 1:07-cv-00398-LM Document 24 Filed 02/25/09 Page 1 of 4
2

plaintiff served its Requests for Admission on October 10, 2008. 

Exhibit 8. Defendant did not file answers or objections within

thirty (30) days. Exhibit 1, p.2, #8. He served a nonsensical

and legally ineffective “Returned for Causes” stamped copy of the

requests. Defendant has therefore admitted tax liabilities to

plaintiff as of October 30, 2006 as follows:

Tax year 1997 $ 5,996.68

Tax year 1998 19,837.50

Tax year 1999 4,480.03

Tax year 2000 4,639.84

Tax year 2001 5,493.32

Tax year 2002 7,551.86

He has admitted that the Internal Revenue Service has properly

assessed the taxes, interest and penalties and that on August 17,

2004 a Notice of Federal Tax Lien was recorded for tax years

1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000, and that a lien for 2001 and 2002 was

filed on June 2, 2005.

Ms. Shepardson has calculated the amounts due as of January

1, 2009 as $52,313.59 plus interest and other statutory additions

after that date. The yearly amounts for 1998 through 2002 are

found on page two of her affidavit. There is no genuine disputed

fact. Defendant is indebted to plaintiff in the amount of

$52,313.09 as of January 9, 2009.

Case 1:07-cv-00398-LM Document 24 Filed 02/25/09 Page 2 of 4
3

II. Standard of Review

Summary judgment is appropriate when “the pleadings,

depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file,

together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no

genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party

is entitled to a judgement as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

56(c). A party seeking summary judgment must first identify the

absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v.

Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). The burden then shifts to the

nonmoving party to “produce evidence on which a reasonable finder

of fact, under the appropriate proof burden, could base a verdict

for it; if that party cannot produce such evidence, the motion

must be granted.” Ayala-Gerena v. Bristol Myers-Squibb Co., 95

F.3d 86, 94 (1st Cir. 1996; see Celotex. 477 U.S. at 323.

III. Analysis

The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) may assess unpaid tax

liabilities. See 26 U.S.C. § 6201 et seq. The IRS Form 4340,

Certificates of Assessments, Payments, and Other Specified

Matters (Exhibits 3-7) are presumptive proof of the amount owing

the United States. See Lefebvre v. Commissioner of Internal

Revenue, 830 F.2d 417, 419 n. 3 (1st Cir. 1987); United States v.

Case 1:07-cv-00398-LM Document 24 Filed 02/25/09 Page 3 of 4
4

Rexach, 482 F.2d 10, 15-17 (1st Cir. 1973); and Gentry v. United

States, 962 F.2d 555, 557 (6th Cir. 1992). The Certificates of

Assessment are presumed correct as to the date and amount of

assessment and of the balances set forth. United States v.

Aivalikles, 278 F.Supp. 2d 141, 143 (D.N.H. 2003).

Once the government produces these Certificates it is

entitled to summary judgment unless the taxpayer presents

evidence to contradict them. Here defendant has simply replied

with a nonsensical response which is devoid of a single shred of

evidence.

Partial summary judgment is granted to plaintiff in the

amount of $52,313.59, plus interest and other statutory additions

accruing from and after January 1, 2009.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: February 25, 2009

cc: Andrea A. Kafka, Esq.

 Henry W. McElroy, Jr., pro se

 David A. Keele, Esq.

 James Patrick Hall, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00398-LM Document 24 Filed 02/25/09 Page 4 of 4