Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Individual’s Tax Court Petition

EDMUND V. MANZANO,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Tax Ct. No. 17650-19

MEMORANDUM^*

Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court

Submitted November 8, 2021^**

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

Edmund V. Manzano appeals pro se from the Tax Court's decision dismissing his petition for failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Hongsermeier v. Comm'r, 621 F.3d 890, 899 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.

The Tax Court properly dismissed Manzano's petition for failure to state a claim because Manzano did not set forth a clear and concise argument of error, or any facts demonstrating error, in the Commissioner's determination of his tax liability for the 2017 tax year. See Tax Ct. R. 34(b)(4) (explaining that a petition must contain “[c]lear and concise assignments of each and every error . . . committed by the Commissioner in the determination of the deficiency . . . [and] . . . [a]ny issue not raised in the assignments of error shall be deemed to be conceded”); Grimes v. Comm'r, 806 F.2d 1451, 1453-54 (9th Cir. 1986) (affirming dismissal where a petitioner failed to present “any justiciable error in his petition for redetermination”).

Manzano's motion to vacate the judgment (Docket Entry No. 21) is denied.

AFFIRMED.