John R. Penta, Plaintiff-appellant, v. United States Internal Revenue Service; Robert Rubin,secretary, of the Treasury; Margaret Milner Richardson,commissioner; Michael Bigelow, Regional Director; Mark D.cox, District Director; K.d. Matson, Chief, Automatedcollection Branch; A.j. Krisco, District Examiner; Dan W.kitterell, Agent; Arizona Department of Revenue; Haroldscott, Director; Reanae Shepherd, Agent, Defendants-appellees, 119 F.3d 6 (9th Cir. 1997)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Roger G. Strand, District Judge, Presiding.
Before: HUG, Chief Judge, KOZINSKI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM*
John R. Penta appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his Amended R.I.C.O. Complaint for Injunctive Relief. We affirm. The district court properly concluded Penta is not entitled to a writ of mandamus to require the Treasury Department to repay Penta's withheld taxes, nor may he bring a RICO claim against the government.
The district court also properly rejected Penta's frivolous contention that he is not liable for federal income taxes because he is not a United States citizen but is rather a private citizen who derives his existence by his private intellectual property.1 See United States v. Nelson ( In re Becraft), 885 F.2d 547, 548 (9th Cir. 1989); Carter v. Commissioner, 784 F.2d 1006, 1009 (9th Cir. 1986); Olson v. Commissioner, 760 F.2d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 1985).
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3
We reject Penta's claims that he was improperly denied a hearing in district court and that the district court failed to make findings of fact and conclusions of law
