Eldo Klingenberg v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ELDO KLINGENBERG,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 09-72945
Tax Ct. No. 6950-08L
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted October 25, 2011**
Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Eldo Klingenberg appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order dismissing his
petition contesting a proposed levy to collect unpaid income tax liabilities for tax
years 1998 through 2003. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We
review for an abuse of discretion the Tax Court’s decision to dismiss a case for
FILED
NOV 02 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-72945 2
lack of prosecution. Edelson v. Comm’r, 829 F.2d 828, 831 (9th Cir. 1987). We
affirm.
The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Klingenberg’s
petition for failure to prosecute because Klingenberg failed to appear at trial and
failed to engage in the mandatory stipulation process, despite warnings that failure
to comply could result in dismissal of the petition. See id. (court did not abuse its
discretion in dismissing the taxpayers’ petitions for failure to prosecute where the
taxpayers had, among other things, failed to appear for trial).
Klingenberg’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --