June 23, 2026·2:19-cv-00421-DCN·Unpublished·By Maria Santos
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court order granting summary judgment to the United States in a tax assessment case. The appellate court held that the taxpayer failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact regarding his liability for the income tax assessments.
Ebenezer K. Howe IV appealed pro se from a district court order of sale and summary judgment in favor of the United States regarding income tax assessments. The district court had denied Howe’s motion to reopen discovery and granted summary judgment for the government.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the case de novo and affirmed because Howe failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact regarding his liability. Under Ninth Circuit precedent, once the government introduces evidence of tax assessments, the burden shifts to the taxpayer to prove non-liability. Official certificates, such as Form four three four zero, serve as proof that assessments were made. The court also found no abuse of discretion in denying the motion to reopen discovery, as Howe did not demonstrate that additional discovery would have precluded summary judgment.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the burden on taxpayers to provide evidence of non-liability once the government produces official assessment records. It also limits the ability to reopen discovery after summary judgment unless the movant shows diligence and that new evidence would change the outcome.
