Court Opinion

ID: 8188
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 05:35:08+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:38:29.696767
License: Public Domain

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                         _____________________

                              No. 95-30636
                            Summary Calendar
                         _____________________

     DON TRUEBLOOD,

                                      Plaintiff-Appellant,

                                versus

     UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE;
     THOMAS GRACE, Individually and in his
     official capacity as an employee/agent of
     the USA/IRS; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Defendants-Appellees.

     _______________________________________________________

         Appeal from the United States District Court for
                 the Western District of Louisiana
                            (CV-94-2315)
     _______________________________________________________
                         December 15, 1995

Before REAVLEY, DUHÉ AND WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Don Trueblood appeals from the district court’s dismissal of

his complaint pursuant to the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C.

§ 7421(a).     He argues that the district court should have

construed his claim under the Administrative Procedure Act,

5 U.S.C. §§ 701-706; applied a judicially-created exception to

     *
      Local rule 47.5 provides: “The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession.” Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
the Anti-Injunction Act; determined that the complaint was

subject to a statutory exemption under 26 U.S.C. § 6213; and

construed portions of his complaint as alleging civil rights

claims.   We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error.   Accordingly, we affirm for

essentially the reasons given by the district court.   Trueblood

v. United States, No. CV-94-2315 (W.D. La. May 26, 1995).

     AFFIRMED.

                                 2