The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
17-1246•Alvin Sheldon Kanofsky v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
17-1246Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 24, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1246
ALVIN SHELDON KANOFSKY,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. Nos. 18162-15; 18163-15; 18182-15)
Submitted: July 20, 2017 Decided: July 24, 2017
Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Alvin Sheldon Kanofsky, Appellant Pro Se. Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Senior Attorney,
Paul Andrew Allulis, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C.; Olivia H. Rembach, Amy Dyar Seals, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
Greensboro, North Carolina; William J. Wilkins, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Alvin Sheldon Kanofsky appeals the tax court’s order upholding the
Commissioner’s notices of deficiency with respect to his 2008, 2009, and 2010 income
tax liability and assessing penalties. The Commissioner has moved to dismiss the appeal
for improper venue. We have reviewed the record and conclude that venue does not lie
in this Circuit. See 28 U.S.C. § 7482(b)(1) (2012). Additionally, we find that transfer of
venue to the Third Circuit is not in the interest of justice. See Sorcia v. Holder, 643 F.3d
117, 122-23 (4th Cir. 2011) (declining to transfer case under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 [(2012)]
due, in part, to “weakness of [the appellant’s] argument on the merits”). Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.