John Hobart Zentmyer v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOHN HOBART ZENTMYER,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
No. 18-72116
Tax Ct. No. 5692-17
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted October 15, 2019**
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
John Hobart Zentmyer appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order dismissing
for failure to state a claim his petition challenging the Commissioner’s imposition
of a levy in a collection action. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C.
§ 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Grimes v. Comm’r, 806 F.2d 1451, 1453 (9th
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
OCT 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-72116
Cir. 1986). We affirm.
The Tax Court properly dismissed Zentmyer’s petition for failure to state a
claim because Zentmyer 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 (income tax is constitutional; taxable
income includes “gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined”
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --