Wayne Robert Risley; Nanette Risley 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
WAYNE ROBERT RISLEY; NANETTE
RISLEY,
Petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent.
No. 10-70656
Tax Ct. No. 10857-05s
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted March 8, 2012**
Pasadena, California
Before: FARRIS, CLIFTON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Because the Risleys elected to bring this case as a small tax case, we lack
jurisdiction to review the decision of the Tax Court. See 26 U.S.C. § 7463(b); see
FILED
MAR 22 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
also Ballard v. Comm’r, 639 F.2d 486 (9th Cir. 1980) (per curiam). We need not
consider the question whether there are circumstances in which we would have
jurisdiction over a due process claim because the Risleys’ claim here is based on
the assertion that the rules governing small tax cases do not allow for summary
judgment, which is incorrect. See Tax Ct. R. Prac. & Proc. 121, 170.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --