Leonard Ashton, Plaintiff-appellant, v. United States; Internal Revenue Service (irs); Nielsen,arras, Daddazio, Polivka, Irs Employees; Governor Wilson;california Franchise Tax Board; Park, President, Oliver &williams Elevator Co. (o & W); Mclaughlin, Paymaster, O &w, Defendant-appellee, 79 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir. 1996)Annotate this Case
Submitted March 12, 1996. *Decided March 18, 1996
Before: GOODWIN, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.
Leonard Ashton appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416, 1421 (9th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 937 (1990), and affirm.
Ashton, a former employee of Oliver & Williams Elevator Co. (O & W), filed this action on April 2, 1993. Ashton refers to himself as a "slave descendant of African ancestry" and maintains he never consented to citizenship and therefore is not subject to state or federal taxes. He insists, inter alia, that forcing him to pay taxes violates international law, constitutes conversion of property, perpetuates slavery, and denies self-determination.
On June 25, 1993, Ashton served the United States Attorney's Office for the Central District of California. On July 13, 1993, the clerk of the court received purported proofs of service on all other defendants. Because the proofs of service on all other defendants except Park and McLaughlin were deficient, the clerk of the court returned the inadequate proofs of service to Ashton. The record shows that Ashton failed to ever correct the deficiencies.
On October 6, 1993, the district court dismissed Ashton's action against the IRS employees in their individual capacities for failure to effect proper service and granted judgment on the pleadings to the United States on the ground of sovereign immunity. On February 27, 1995, the district court denied Ashton's motion for judicial notice of "citizenship not verified." On March 24, 1995, the district court dismissed Ashton's action against Park and McLaughlin for failure to state a claim. On April 17, 1995, the district court dismissed without prejudice Ashton's action against the remaining defendants for failure to effect proper service.
We affirm the district court's orders of October 6, 1993, February 27, 1995, and March 24, 1995 for the reasons stated by the district court. Because Ashton has failed to show that he ever properly served Governor Wilson or the Franchise Tax Board, we affirm the district court's April 17, 1995 order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, 12(b) (5).