- 4 - In response to petitioner’s request for an administrative hearing, the Appeals officer assigned to petitioner’s case contacted petitioner by telephone on June 11, 2001. During this telephone conversation, the Appeals officer asked petitioner to schedule a conference date for a face-to-face, in-person, or telephone conference. Petitioner stated that he wanted his congressional liaison present at the meeting and the Appeals officer expressed doubt as to the liaison’s attending as that was not the standard practice. The Appeals officer further explained that typically petitioner and the Appeals officer were expected to attempt to resolve the case. Upon resolution, the Appeals officer would notify the congressional liaison of the resolution. At this point, petitioner took the Appeals officer’s number and stated he would call him at a later time. On June 12, 2001, the Appeals officer received a call from petitioner’s congressional liaison concerning petitioner’s case. The Appeals officer then telephoned petitioner and left a recorded message asking petitioner to call him to schedule an appointment. No further communication occurred until August 2001. On August 21, 2001, the Appeals officer again telephoned petitioner and offered the date of September 3, 2001. Petitioner noted that September 3 was the Labor Day holiday. The Appeals officer then offered alternative dates of September 4 or 5.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011