Case Name: William J. LICHA; Alicia T. Licha, AKA Alicia Tovar, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-12-03
Citations: 586 F. App'x 350
Docket Number: No. 12-72170
Parties: William J. LICHA; Alicia T. Licha, AKA Alicia Tovar, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 586
Pages: 350–350

Head Matter:
William J. LICHA; Alicia T. Licha, AKA Alicia Tovar, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 12-72170.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 18, 2014.
Filed Dec. 3, 2014.
William J. Licha, Van Nuys, CA, pro se.
Alicia T. Licha, Van Nuys, CA, pro se.
Robert R. Di Trolio, Esquire, Clerk, U.S. Tax Court, John A. Dicicco, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Joan I. Oppenheimer, Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, John Schumann, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, William J. Wilkins, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
William J. Licha and Alicia T. Licha, a.k.a. Alicia Tovar, appeal pro se from the Tax Court's decision, entered after a bench trial, upholding the Commissioner of Internal Revenue's deficiency determination and accuracy-related penalties for tax years 2001 through 2006. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482. We review de novo the Tax Court's legal conclusions and for clear error its findings of fact, Kelley v. Comm'r, 45 F.3d 348, 350 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm.
The Tax Court properly upheld the deficiency determination because the Commissioner presented "some substantive evidence" that the Lichas failed to report income and capital gains for the tax years at issue, and the Lichas did not submit any relevant evidence "showing that the deficiencies] w[ere] arbitrary or erroneous." Hardy v. Comm'r, 181 F.3d 1002, 1004-05 (9th Cir.1999).
We reject as unsupported by law or evidence the Lichas' contentions that the Tax Court and the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") have no authority to determine deficiencies, the IRS's failure to include "OMB Control Numbers" on various documents relieves the Lichas of their duty to pay federal income taxes, the IRS improperly denied their Freedom of Information Act requests, and the tax court judge was biased against them.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, including any challenge to the Tax Court's accuracy-related penalties. Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.