- 8 - for abuse of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000). Based upon our examination of the entire record before us, we find that respondent did not abuse respondent’s discretion in determining to proceed with the collection action as determined in the notice of determination with respect to petitioner’s taxable years 1995 and 1998. We have considered all of the parties’ contentions and arguments that are not discussed herein, and we find them to be without merit and/or irrelevant. On the record before us, we shall grant respondent’s motion. To reflect the foregoing, An appropriate order granting respondent’s motion and decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Last modified: November 10, 2007