Anna E. Charlton - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         
               On August 18, 2006, our standing pretrial order and the                
          notice setting case for trial, scheduling trial in this case for            
          January 22, 2007, were served on petitioner by certified mail at            
          the address she provided in her petition.  That mailing was not             
          returned by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS).  On August 25, 2006,            
          the Court issued an order to file a joint status report to both             
          parties.  This order was served on petitioner on August 28, 2006,           
          by certified mail at the address she provided in her petition.              
          That mailing was not returned by the USPS.  Pursuant to the                 
          Court's order, respondent filed respondent's status report on               
          September 25, 2006, in which he indicated he had been                       
          unsuccessful in contacting petitioner and was therefore filing a            
          separate status report.  Petitioner did not submit a status                 
          report.                                                                     
               This case was called from the calendar for the trial session           
          of the Court that commenced on January 22, 2007, at Philadelphia,           
          Pennsylvania.  There was no appearance by or on behalf of                   
          petitioner.  Counsel for respondent appeared and filed a motion             
          to dismiss for lack of prosecution (motion to dismiss) and a                
          motion for leave to file amended answer (motion to amend), and              
          lodged an amended answer with the Court.  In his proposed amended           
          answer, respondent conceded petitioner's liability for the                  
          section 6651(a)(2) addition to tax and, because that concession             
          removed the limitation imposed by section 6651(c)(1), respondent            







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007