Case Name: Wayne Robert RISLEY; Nanette Risley, Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-22
Citations: 472 F. App'x 557
Docket Number: No. 10-70656
Parties: Wayne Robert RISLEY; Nanette Risley, Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 472
Pages: 557–557

Head Matter:
Wayne Robert RISLEY; Nanette Risley, Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
No. 10-70656.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2012.
Filed March 22, 2012.
Robert Risley, Law Office of Robert L. Risley, Pasadena, CA, for Petitioners.
Robert R. Di Trolio, Esquire, Clerk, U.S. Tax Court, John A. Nolet, David I. Pincus, Bridget Maria Rowan, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division/Appellate Section, Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: FARRIS, CLIFTON, and IKUTA, 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
Because the Risleys elected to bring this case as a small tax case, we lack jurisdiction to review the decision of the Tax Court. See 26 U.S.C. § 7463(b); see also Ballard v. Comm'r, 639 F.2d 486 (9th Cir. 1980) (per curiam). We need not consider the question whether there are circumstances in which we would have jurisdiction over a due process claim because the Risleys' claim here is based on the assertion that the rules governing small tax cases do not allow for summary judgment, which is incorrect. See Tax Ct. R. Prac. & Proc. 121,170.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.