- 6 -
Petitioner's remaining answers were evasive and
unresponsive, as illustrated by the following examples:
(1) In request for admission (request) 1, respondent
asserted that during the years in issue, petitioner worked as an
engineering technician for General Dynamics Corp. and Rohr
Industries, Inc., in San Diego and Chula Vista, California,
respectively. In petitioner's response, he stated that he
is without knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of respondent's allegations.
Respondent has not identified the term "employed" to be
defined within the subject matter or scope of any
statute and implementing regulation.
In further reply, Petitioner had no contract of
employment with either General Dynamics Corporation or
Rohr Industries.
(2) In request 3, respondent asserted that petitioner
resided at 1655 Oleander Avenue, Chula Vista, California, during
the years in issue. In response, petitioner stated that he "is
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as
to the truth of respondent's allegations. * * * [R]espondent has
not defined 'residing' under a statute or section of a statute
and its implementing regulations."
(3) In request 5, respondent asserted that petitioner did
not reside outside the United States at any time during the years
in issue. In response, petitioner again stated that he lacked
sufficient information to answer. In addition, he stated that
"respondent does not cite any statute * * * defining 'reside' or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011