Bennett Roy Arnstein v. United States

21 F.3d 1111 73 A.F.T.R.2d 94 -1815 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Bennett Roy ARNSTEIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-55639. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 5, 1994. * Decided April 11, 1994. Before: POOLE, BEEZER and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Bennett Roy Arnstein appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his petition to recover money seized by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for failure to state a claim for relief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we vacate and remand. 3 The government contends that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over this action because Arnstein failed to file with the IRS a claim for refund of his taxes prior to bringing this action. This contention has merit. 4 The existence of subject-matter jurisdiction is a question of law which we review de novo. Gerritsen v. Consulado General de…