- 6 -
that respondent planned to file a motion for summary judgment and
to impose a penalty under section 6673(a)(1).
In a letter dated October 23, 2006, petitioner asserted that
discovery was unnecessary because review of petitioner’s case by
the Court should be limited to the administrative record. On
December 8, 2006, petitioner filed a motion to set aside the
trial date and to set a briefing schedule, arguing that the Court
should not conduct a trial but instead should look at the
administrative record to review respondent’s determination. The
Court denied petitioner’s motion, and on January 16, 2007,
petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration. The motion for
reconsideration was calendared for hearing at the February 5,
2007, Los Angeles, California, trial session.
On January 23, 2007, respondent filed a motion for summary
judgment, which the Court also calendared for hearing on the
February 5, 2007, trial date. On February 2, 2007, petitioner
filed a statement under Rule 50(c) in lieu of appearing at the
trial session.4
On February 5, 2007, petitioner failed to appear at the
scheduled trial session. The Court denied petitioner’s motion
4Rule 50(c) permits a party subject to a hearing on a motion
to submit a statement of his position with supporting documents
in lieu of or in addition to attendance at the hearing. It does
not authorize the submission of a statement in lieu of an
appearance at trial.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008