Marcon, Inc. v. United States of America

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).
*** The Honorable Raner C. Collins, United States District Judge for the
District of Arizona, sitting by designation.
1
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARCON, INC., et al,
Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent-Appellee.
No. 10-35464
D.C. No. 1:08-mc-06562-EJL-
REB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 13, 2011**
Seattle, Washington
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, PAEZ, Circuit Judge, and COLLINS, District
Judge.***
Taxpayers MarCon, Inc. and Elaine Martin appeal the district court’s denial of
FILED
NOV 07 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
their petition to quash an IRS summons issued to a third-party record keeper in
December 2008. We review the denial of a petition to quash an IRS summons for
clear error. Fortney v. United States, 59 F.3d 117, 119 (9th Cir. 1995). We have
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we AFFIRM.
The IRS met its burden under United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48 (1964), to
make a prima facie showing that the December summons issued in good faith, and this
showing was not refuted by Taxpayers. The December summons was not tainted by
an earlier summons because (1) if the IRS already possessed the information requested
in the earlier summons, then the earlier summons did not form the basis for the
December summons, and (2) the earlier summons properly issued. The IRS wasn’t
obligated to give notice , and it didn’t already possess the requested information. In
addition, the December summons did not issue for the improper purpose of furthering
a criminal investigation because (1) the matter had not yet been referred to the
Department of Justice for prosecution, and (2) there is no evidence in the record that
the IRS delayed such a referral in bad faith. See United States v. Stuart, 489 U.S. 353,
362-63 (1989).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --