Opinion
13065-20L
03-22-2022
Ricky Len Ward Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Respondent
ORDER
Alina I. Marshall Judge
On January 13, 2022, respondent filed a motion for summary judgment. On the same day, respondent filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to a notice of deficiency for the 2016 tax year. On January 27, 2022, the Court issued an order directing petitioner to file on or before February 14, 2022, a response to respondent's motion for summary judgment. On the same day, the Court issued an order directing petitioner to file on or before February 14, 2022, a response to respondent's motion dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to a notice of deficiency for the 2016 tax year. Petitioner filed no such responses.
On March 14, 2022, this case was called from the calendar for the remote Trial Session of the Court for cases in which Louisville, Kentucky, was the place of trial. There was no appearance by or on behalf of petitioner. Respondent appeared and was heard.
The Court may, under Rule 123 of the Tax Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure, dismiss a case for failure of a petitioner properly to prosecute or to comply with the Court's Rules and orders. Petitioner's noncompliance with the Court's orders and failure to appear are not excused. In order to allow him one last opportunity to have this case resolved on the merits, and for cause more fully appearing in the transcript of this proceeding, it is
ORDERED that, on or before April 18, 2022, petitioner shall file a separate response to respondent's motion for summary judgment and respondent's motion dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to a notice of deficiency for the 2016 tax year each filed January 13, 2022. Petitioner's response to respondent's motion for summary judgment shall outline in detail: (1) his reasons for asserting that respondent's notice of determination is erroneous; (2) the evidence he would present at trial to support his assertions that respondent's notice of determination is erroneous; (3) why his failure to file a timely response to respondent's motions and to appear at the trial in this case held on March 14, 2022, was not due to petitioner's negligence or disregard for the Court's orders; and (4) why respondent would not be prejudiced if the Court were to deny respondent's motion for summary judgment or respondent's motion dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to a notice of deficiency for the 2016 tax year and set another date for trial. It is further
ORDERED that jurisdiction is retained by the undersigned.