DEAN STEEVES V. IRS, No. 20-56065 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 18 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DEAN ALLEN STEEVES, Acting Trustee of Brother’s Keeper Ministries, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 20-56065 D.C. No. 3:20-cv-00978-LAB Plaintiff-Appellant, MEMORANDUM* v. UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 8, 2021** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and MILLER, Circuit Judges. Dean Allen Steeves appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action seeking to quash a summons served on a third party, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). We have jurisdiction * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. Mollison v. United States, 568 F.3d 1073, 1075 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Steeves’s action for lack of jurisdiction because Steeves failed to file his petition to quash the IRS’s summons in a timely manner. See I.R.C. § 7609(b)(2)(A) (a petition to quash an IRS summons must be filed within 20 days from the date notice of the summons is given); Mollison, 568 F.3d at 1075 (“Section 7609(b)(2) constitutes the government’s consent to waive sovereign immunity. . .” and limitations and conditions on that consent “. . . must be strictly observed. . . .”). We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED. 2 20-56065

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.