In Re Roger Valmy; in Re Dana Valmy, Debtors.roger Valmy; Dana Valmy, Plaintiffs-appellants v. United States of America; United States Internal Revenueservice, Defendants-appellees, 131 F.3d 150 (9th Cir. 1997)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 131 F.3d 150 (9th Cir. 1997) Submitted Nov. 5, 1997. **Decided Nov. 14, 1997

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, No. CV-95-07713-RSWL; Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding.

Before: BROWNING, BRUNETTI, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM* 

Appellants Roger and Dana Valmy appeal the district court's order dismissing their case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We review a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction de novo. State of Alaska v. Babbitt, 75 F.3d 449, 451 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied sub nom., Alaska v. Babbitt, 117 S. Ct. 70 (1996). We may affirm the district court's dismissal on any independently sufficient ground. O'Neill v. United States, 44 F.3d 803, 804 (9th Cir. 1995).

We agree with the district court's finding that appellants' complaint was untimely under both 26 U.S.C. § 6532(a) and 11 U.S.C. § 505(a) (2) (B) (i). We find appellants' argument that their second claim "related back" to their first claim unpersuasive. Since appellants' complaint was untimely, we need not pass on whether the original claim satisfied the requirements of 26 U.S.C. § 7422.

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 Circuit Rule 36-3

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.