- 18 -
October 15, 2001, at the call of these consolidated cases from
the Court’s trial calendar.
At the trial held by the Court in the cases at docket Nos.
10765-00 and 10766-00, neither Mr. Richards nor any authorized
representative of Mr. Richards appeared.
The written response by Mr. Richards to respondent’s motion
to dismiss for lack of prosecution and to impose sanctions under
section 6673 in the case at docket No. 10766-00 does not contain
any valid reason why that case should not be dismissed for lack
of prosecution.13 That response contained contentions and argu-
ments that the Court found in the Court’s January 18, 2002 Order
to be frivolous and/or groundless. The joint brief filed by Mr.
Richards (and Richards Management Trust and Richards Charitable
Trust) also contains statements, contentions, and arguments that
the Court finds to be frivolous and/or groundless and do not set
forth any valid reason why the cases at docket Nos. 10765-00 and
10766-00 should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution.
Section 7491(c) provides in pertinent part:
SEC. 7491. BURDEN OF PROOF.
(c) Penalties.–-Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of this title, the Secretary shall have the burden
of production in any court proceeding with respect to
the liability of any individual for any penalty * * *.
13Mr. Richards did not file a response to respondent’s
motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution and to impose sanctions
under sec. 6673 in the case at docket No. 10765-00.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011