ZENTMYER v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

John Hobart Zentmyer appeals pro se from the Tax Court's order dismissing for failure to state a claim his petition challenging the Commissioner's imposition of a levy in a collection action. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Grimes v. Comm'r, 806 F.2d 1451, 1453 (9th Cir. 1986). We affirm.

The Tax Court properly dismissed Zentmyer's petition for failure to state a claim because Zentmyer did not set forth a clear and concise assignment of error or any facts demonstrating error in the Commissioner's determinations. See Tax Ct. R. 34(b)(4); Grimes, 806 F.2d at 1453 (income tax is constitutional; taxable income includes “gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.