Opinion
15328-21W
01-12-2023
THOMAS L. BRODERICK, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge.
Petitioner seeks in this case review of a notice of determination under section 7623 concerning whistleblower action. The notice of determination on which this case is based states in relevant part: "The Whistleblower Office has made a final decision to reject your claim for an award. The claim was rejected because the information submitted was not completed in its entirety * * *." On November 15, 2021, respondent filed a Motion for Entry of Order That Undenied Allegations Be Deemed Admitted Pursuant to Rule 37(c).
By opinion issued January 11, 2022, in the case of Li v. Commissioner, 22 F.4th 1014 (D.C. Cir. 2022), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (to which all whistleblower cases under section 7623 are appealable pursuant to section 7482(b)(1)) held that the Tax Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction of whistleblower cases, such as this one, in which the IRS rejects the whistleblower claim and therefore does not commence any administrative or judicial proceeding based on the whistleblower's information. On March 7, 2022, the Court issued an Order staying the proceedings in this case.
On August 30, 2022, the Supreme Court docketed a petition for writ of certiorari, filed by the whistleblower in Li, as of June 16, 2022. By order issued October 31, 2022, the Supreme Court denied the whistleblower's petition for a writ of certiorari in Li. A review of the Supreme Court docket in Li reflects that a petition for rehearing of the order denying the writ of certiorari has not been docketed, as of the date of this Order. See U.S. Sup. Ct. Rule 44(2) (providing that such a petition must be filed "within 25 days after the date of the order of denial"). We therefore conclude that the judgment in Li is now final and will thus dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the stay of proceedings in this case is lifted. It is further
ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion for Entry of Order That Undenied Allegations Be Deemed Admitted Pursuant to Rule 37(c) is denied as moot.