Steeves v. Internal Revenue Service

District Court, S.D. California · 3:20-cv-00204 · 2020-04-13 · Unknown

Proceeding: district
Area: civil
Panel: Larry Alan Burns (author)

Analysis

A model's reading — qwen3.8-27b, prompt own-v1, 2026-10-13T23:47Z · confidence high

The IRS moved to dismiss the action as moot after withdrawing the summons challenged by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did not file an opposition. The court granted the motion and dismissed the case without prejudice.

What the court decided	The model
Motion to Dismiss Granted “Defendant’s motion is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.”	agree with court The court correctly applied the mootness doctrine. When the government withdraws a summons, the specific controversy regarding the validity of that summons is resolved, rendering the petition to quash moot. The citation to Pacific Fisheries Inc. v. United States supports this conclusion. Dismissing without prejudice is the standard procedural outcome for mootness, allowing the plaintiff to refile if the summons is reissued.

What the court decided

The model

Motion to Dismiss Granted

“Defendant’s motion is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.”

agree with court
The court correctly applied the mootness doctrine. When the government withdraws a summons, the specific controversy regarding the validity of that summons is resolved, rendering the petition to quash moot. The citation to Pacific Fisheries Inc. v. United States supports this conclusion. Dismissing without prejudice is the standard procedural outcome for mootness, allowing the plaintiff to refile if the summons is reissued.

The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and relies on binding Ninth Circuit precedent that directly addresses the specific factual scenario (withdrawal of a summons). The lack of opposition from the plaintiff further supports the dismissal. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for a mootness dismissal.

How this analysis was made · dispute it

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 49 || DEAN ALLEN STEEVES, on behalf of CASE NO. 20cv204-LAB (BGS) Brother's Keeper Ministries, et al., Pini, ORDER GRANTING MOTION To 12 vs. 13 || INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, 14 Defendants. 15 On April 7, 2020, the Internal Revenue Service filed an ex parte Motion to Dismiss, 16 || noting that the agency had withdrawn the summons Plaintiff Dean Allen Steeves 17 || challenges in this action. See Dkt. 10; see also Pacific Fisheries Inc. v. United States, 18 || 484 F.3d 1103, 1105-06 (9th Cir. 2007) (holding that a petition to quash is moot when a 49 || summons has been withdrawn). The Court ordered Plaintiff to file any opposition to the 20 || IRS’s motion by April 10, 2020. No opposition was filed. Defendant’s motion is 21 || GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT. The clerk 22 || is directed to close the case. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 || Dated: April 13, 2020 lau / A (4, WY 25 HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS Chief United States District Judge 27 28