Richard C.Y. Ing Helen W.Y. Ing v. United States

73 F.3d 369 77 A.F.T.R.2d 96 -625, 96-1 USTC P 50,100 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Richard C.Y. ING; Helen W.Y. Ing, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-15163. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 8, 1995. Decided Dec. 22, 1995. Before: HUG, THOMPSON, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Richard and Helen Ing, a married couple ("the Ings"), appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment against them. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. I. 3 The Ings argue that the district court erred in concluding that they were not entitled to a casualty theft deduction, and therefore, it erred in granting the Government's summary judgment motion. We review a district court's grant of summary judgment de novo. Warren v. City of Carlsbad, 58 F.3d 439, 441 (9th Cir.), petition for cert. filed, 64 U.S.L.W. 3271 (U.S. Sept. 20, 1995) (No.…