The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral… v. United States of America;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-55549
D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00498-JFW-
FFM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
John Zilei Zhong appeals pro se from the district court judgment dismissing
for lack of subject matter jurisdiction Zhong’s action brought under the
Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) challenging his suspension from practice
before the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
* 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).
JOHN ZILEI ZHONG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
FILED
FEB 5 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1291. We review de novo, Gallo Cattle Co. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 159 F.3d
1194, 1196 (9th Cir. 1998), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Zhong’s action for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction because the IRS’s expedited suspension of Zhong’s right to
practice is not a final agency decision. See id. at 1198-99, 1200 (holding that there
is no subject matter jurisdiction under the APA in the absence of “final agency
action” and explaining when an agency action is “final”); see also 31 C.F.R.
§§ 10.60, 10.82(g); Navajo Nation v. Dep’t of the Interior, 2017 WL 5986567,
at *19 (9th Cir. Dec. 4, 2017) (concluding that “[section] 704’s ‘final agency
action’ limitation applies only to APA claims”).
AFFIRMED.
2 17-55549

-- 2 of 2 --