- 6 - authorized to impose “monetary sanctions of up to $25,000 for instituting or maintaining an action before it primarily for delay or for taking a position that is frivolous or groundless”, and stated that petitioner’s positions in this case had no merit and were groundless. Petitioner submitted a timely petition appealing respondent’s determination, which we filed on April 1, 2004. In an addendum attached to the petition, petitioner asserted, inter alia, that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had not established that he was a taxpayer, that the hearing was a sham, that Ms. Chadwell was biased, and that the law did not create the alleged obligation. On October 6, 2004, we received and filed respondent’s summary judgment motion. By order dated October 6, 2004, we ordered petitioner to file a response to respondent’s motion on or before October 27, 2004. Petitioner did not do so.2 On November 3, 2004, we received and filed petitioner’s motion to strike respondent’s motion for summary judgment, which we denied on November 4, 2004. 2Petitioner submitted a response to respondent’s motion on Dec. 1, 2004, but it was returned to petitioner as untimely. On Dec. 17, 2004, petitioner submitted a document entitled “Petitioner’s motion accept response as timely”, which we filed as of that date and denied on Dec. 23, 2004. The response that was attached repeated the arguments contained in the petition and other submissions.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011