Jay
Jay v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Russell C. Jay appeals pro se from the tax court’s order dismissing for failure to *574 state a claim his petition challenging the Commissioner’s imposition of a levy in a collection action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482 (a)(1). We review de novo. Grimes v. Commissioner-, 806 F.2d 1451, 1453 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam). We affirm.
The tax court properly dismissed Jay’s petition for failure to state a claim because he did not set forth a clear and concise assignment of error or any facts demonstrating error in the Commissioner’s determinations. See Tax Ct. R. 34(b)(4); Grimes, 806 F.2d at 1453-54 .
The tax court also acted within its discretion when imposing a 26 U.S.C. § 6673 penalty against Jay for taking a frivolous position. See Grimes, 806 F.2d at 1454 .
Jay’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
Because the arguments raised in Jay’s appeal are frivolous and duplicate the arguments raised in his previous appeal, we grant the government’s request for $8,000 in sanctions, an amount not contested by Jay. See Fed. R.App. P. 38; Grimes, 806 F.2d at 1454 .