John Ramirez v. United States ( 2015 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 19 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOHN B. RAMIREZ, aka Johnny Rhondo, No. 12-56896
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 8:12-cv-00986-JVS-RNB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 13, 2015**
Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
John B. Ramirez, aka Johnny Rhondo, appeals pro se from the district
court’s order denying his petition to quash an Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
summons issued to a third-party financial institution. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for clear error, United States v. Richey, 632 F.3d
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
559, 563 (9th Cir. 2011), and we affirm.
The district court properly denied Ramirez’s petition to quash because
Ramirez failed to rebut the IRS’s showing that the summons was issued in good
faith. See id. at 564 (a taxpayer has a heavy burden to show an abuse of process or
lack of good faith once the IRS makes a prima facie showing that a summons was
issued for a legitimate purpose); see also Fortney v. United States, 59 F.3d 117,
121 (9th Cir. 1995) (a taxpayer is only entitled to an evidentiary hearing if he
presents evidence of a lack of good faith; legal conclusions, memoranda of law,
and allegations are insufficient).
We reject Ramirez’s contentions concerning the Fourth Amendment,
probable cause, and leave to amend his petition.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).
Ramirez’s motions and requests for judicial notice, set forth in his opening
and reply briefs, are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 12-56896