From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Norfleet v. U.S.

United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division
Oct 30, 2002
No. 5:02-CV-515-BR (E.D.N.C. Oct. 30, 2002)

Opinion

No. 5:02-CV-515-BR

October 30, 2002


ORDER


This matter is before the court on the government's motion to dismiss the petition brought pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7609(b)(2). Despite having been sent a Roseboro notice, petitioner, who is proceeding pro se, did not respond to the motion. The court agrees with the government that this court lacks jurisdiction to determine the validity of the administrative summonses at issue. All of the entities summoned are located outside of this judicial district. (See Pet., Exs. A-E; Supp. Pet.) Accordingly, this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. See 26 U.S.C. § 7609(h)(1) ("The United States district court for the district within which the person to be summoned resides or is found shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any proceeding brought under (b)(2), (f), or (g)."). The motion to dismiss is ALLOWED, and the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.


Summaries of

Norfleet v. U.S.

United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division
Oct 30, 2002
No. 5:02-CV-515-BR (E.D.N.C. Oct. 30, 2002)
Case details for

Norfleet v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:COBURN T. NORFLEET, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division

Date published: Oct 30, 2002

Citations

No. 5:02-CV-515-BR (E.D.N.C. Oct. 30, 2002)