Case Name: Mark J. MEYER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-29
Citations: 175 F. App'x 808
Docket Number: No. 05-15317
Parties: Mark J. MEYER, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before: CANBY, BEEZER, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 175
Pages: 808–808

Head Matter:
Mark J. MEYER, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 05-15317.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2006.
Filed March 29, 2006.
Mark J. Meyer, Honolulu, HI, pro se. Robert L. Baker, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: CANBY, BEEZER, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Mark J. Meyer appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his action seeking a declaratory judgment in connection with the Internal Revenue Service's collection of federal income taxes and penalties for tax years 1996-1999. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Montes v. United States, 37 F.3d 1347, 1351 (9th Cir.1994), and we affirm.
The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to grant the relief Meyer requested. See 28 U.S.C. § 2201(a) (prohibiting declaratory judgment suits for relief in federal tax cases); 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a) (prohibiting injunctions against any and all acts necessary or incidental to the collection of taxes); Sokolow v. United States, 169 F.3d 663, 664-65 (9th Cir.1999).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.