Opinion
Case No. 03-CV-72434
March 19, 2004
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT
In this case there have been numerous hearings, and an Opinion and a Procedural Order which followed these hearings, I refer to the Opinion filed April 28, 2000 and the Procedural Order filed October 29, 2003.
In the Opinion filed April 28, 2000, the factual background for Plaintiffs' Complaint is adequately discussed and need not be repeated here.
In the hearing that preceded the Procedural Order of October 29, 2003, Plaintiffs' counsel stated that there was no further need for a Vaugn Index or for any other documents that may have been sought by Plaintiffs in their request under the Freedom of Information Act.
This Court notes that IRS Chief Counsel Advice Memorandum, No, 200203002, upon which Plaintiffs rely, is a part of the court file.
I did however, permit Plaintiffs another opportunity to contend that the 105C Letter sent to them by the Internal Revenue Service was not an appropriate Notice of Claim Disallowance. This is the sole issue still before me. The parties have briefed this issue and I have held a hearing on it and I now conclude that the Notice of Disallowance of Plaintiffs' claim is legally sufficient.
I find that there is no legal requirement that mandates that reference to a two year statute of limitations be Included in a Notice of Claim Disallowance of the type Issued to the Strongs. I find that the Notice of Disallowance is Dot ambiguous and that it adequately advised Plaintiffs that their claim had been disallowed. The contention, that Plaintiffs make in this case, that the position of the Internal Revenue Service is not fair, is not a tenable claim.
Accordingly, the Statute of limitations having run on Plaintiffs' refund claim, they are precluded from re-litigating that claim and their Complaint be and is hereby DISMISSED.