Case Name: Kevin David POMERENKE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Cheryl BIRD, c/o IRS; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-10-02
Citations: 578 F. App'x 621
Docket Number: No. 14-1468
Parties: Kevin David POMERENKE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Cheryl BIRD, c/o IRS; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Bankruptcy Reporter
Volume: 519
Pages: 621–622

Head Matter:
Kevin David POMERENKE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Cheryl BIRD, c/o IRS; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-1468.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 23, 2014.
Filed: Oct. 2, 2014.
Kevin David Pomerenke, Eagan, MN, pro se.
Harris J. Phillips, Teresa E. McLaughlin, Rachel Ida Wollitzer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Kevin Pomerenke appeals the district court's dismissal, for lack of jurisdiction, of his complaint claiming that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) violated the Bankruptcy Act by garnishing his wages after his tax liabilities purportedly had been discharged in prior bankruptcy proceedings. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed the complaint, after appropriately substituting the United States as the defendant in this action. See 26 U.S.C. § 7422(a) (no suit shall be maintained in any court for recovery of internal revenue tax alleged to have been erroneously or illegally assessed or collected until claim for refund or credit has been duly filed with Secretary), and (f) (suit for recovery of IRS tax alleged to have been erroneously or illegally collected, or any penalty claimed to have been collected without, authority, may be maintained only against the United States and not against any of its officers or employees); see also Doe v. Nixon, 716 F.3d 1041, 1051 (8th Cir.2013) (district court's grant of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is reviewed de novo).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir, R. 47B.
. The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.