Barrett v. Commissioner , 695 F. App'x 273 ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 14 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RITA BARRETT, No. 16-73031
Petitioner-Appellant, Tax Ct. No. 26207-15
v.
MEMORANDUM*
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted August 9, 2017**
Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Rita Barrett appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s summary judgment in her
action challenging the disallowance of her request for an abatement of interest for
the tax year 1976. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a). We review de
novo. Miller v. Comm’r, 310 F.3d 640, 642 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Tax Court properly granted summary judgment on the basis of res
judicata because Barrett raised the same claim regarding abatement of interest for
the 1976 tax year in a prior tax court proceeding that was decided on the merits.
See Baker v. IRS (In re Baker), 74 F.3d 906, 910 (9th Cir. 1996) (“Under th[e]
doctrine [of res judicata], a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the
parties from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.”).
Contrary to Barrett’s contentions, Barrett failed to identify any new evidence or
fraudulent conduct that would preclude the application of res judicata.
We reject as meritless Barrett’s contention that her case was not adequately
considered as a result of the assignment to a new judge.
Because we affirm on the basis of res judicata, we do not consider the merits
of Barrett’s claims.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-73031