Court Opinion

ID: 9373898
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-22 16:10:21.901562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:43.825204
License: Public Domain

FILED
                                                                                JAN 12 2023
                          NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              SUSAN M. SPRAUL, CLERK
                                                                              U.S. BKCY. APP. PANEL
                                                                              OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

          UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL
                    OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

 In re:                                              BAP No. CC-21-1252-TLF
 JOHN PAUL SALVADOR,
              Debtor.                                Bk. No. 6:19-bk-19296-SC

 JOHN PAUL SALVADOR,                                 Adv. No. 6:20-ap-01010-SC
              Appellant,
 v.                                                  MEMORANDUM*
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
              Appellee.

               Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court
                      for the Central District of California
                Scott C. Clarkson, Bankruptcy Judge, Presiding

Before: TAYLOR, LAFFERTY, and FARIS, Bankruptcy Judges.

      Debtor John Paul Salvador appeals the bankruptcy court’s judgment

declaring that income taxes he owed to the Internal Revenue Service for the

2003, 2004, 2006, and 2009 tax years were nondischargeable in his chapter 7

bankruptcy case. As Debtor admits, however, the bankruptcy court’s ruling

      *
        This disposition is not appropriate for publication. Although it may be cited for
whatever persuasive value it may have, see Fed. R. App. P. 32.1, it has no precedential
value, see 9th Cir. BAP Rule 8024-1.
is consistent with binding Ninth Circuit authority. Therefore, the

bankruptcy court did not err, and we AFFIRM. 1

      1 We acknowledge that we serve as a mere way station during Debtor’s
campaign seeking a change in the Circuit’s precedent. But his arguments are based on
Supreme Court authority that pre-dates the existing Circuit decisions, not subsequent
statutory or case law developments. Thus, there is no basis for additional discussion of
the merits except to note that we also agree with the IRS that: (1) Debtor’s position on
appeal was not raised before the bankruptcy court; (2) thus, the arguments on appeal
are waived; and (3) exceptional circumstances do not justify their consideration.
                                            2