Vrame et al v. USA
| Chris Vrane, Demetra E. Vrane, Chris Vrame and Demetra E. Vrame |
| United States of America |
| 2:2022mc00104 |
| March 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Morrison C England |
| Jeremy D Peterson |
| Tax Suits: IRS-Third Party |
| 26 U.S.C. ยง 7609 IRS: Petition to Quash IRS Summons |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 6, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MOTION TO DISMISS or in the alternative, summarily deny the petition by United States of America re #1 Motion to Quash. Attorney Green, Tijuhna A. added. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Attachment A to Declaration)(Green, Tijuhna) Modified on 4/28/2022 (Mena-Sanchez, L). |
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Chris Vrame, Demetra E. Vrame re #7 Order. (Luoma, Richard) |
Filing 7
AMENDED ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 4/11/2022 ORDERING that the 4/14/2022, hearing re #1 Motion to Quash is CONTINUED to 5/26/2022 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 (JDP) before Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson. Any opposition to the motion shall be filed by no later 5/12/2022. Petitioners may file a reply to respondent's opposition, if any, by 5/19/2022. By no later than 4/15/2022, Petitioner shall serve a copy of this order on all interested parties, including the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California; The Attorney General of the United States; Internal Revenue Service Agent Lor O'Brien; First Norther Bank; and Five Star Bank. Petitioners shall also file with the court, by no later than 5/15/2022, a proof of service of this order on all interested parties. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
| Filing 6 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Chris Vrame, Demetra E. Vrame re #5 Order. (Luoma, Richard) Modified on 4/11/2022 (Reader, L). |
|
Filing 5
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 04/07/2022 CONTINUING the Motion Hearing to 5/26/2022 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 (JDP) before Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson. Respondent will have until 04/28/2022, to file an opposition to petitioners' motion. Petitioners will have until 05/09/2022, to file a reply, if any. Within 7 days of the date of this order, petitioners must file a proof of service of this order on all interested parties. (Rodriguez, E)
|
| Filing 4 DECLARATION of R. Todd Luoma re #3 Certificate of Service. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit C, #2 Exhibit D, #3 Exhibit E, #4 Exhibit F, #5 Exhibit G)(Luoma, Richard) Modified on 4/7/2022 (Huang, H). |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Chris Vrame, Demetra E. Vrame re #1 Motion to Quash. (Luoma, Richard) |
| Filing 2 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy N. Cannarozzi for Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 3/10/2022: Petitioners' #1 Motion to Quash is ordered SET for hearing on 4/14/2022 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 (JDP) before Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson. (Text only entry)(Cannarozzi, N) |
| PAYMENT for miscellaneous case filing fee in the amount of $ 49, receipt number ACAEDC-10114203. (Luoma, Richard) [Filer paid the wrong amount for Misc Fee; refunded receipt ACAEDC-10112785 in the amount of $402] Modified on 3/9/2022 (Woodson, A). |
| NEW MISCELLANEOUS CASE FILED Motion to Quash. (Coll, A) |
| Filing 1 MOTION TO QUASH IRS Summons by All Petitioners. Attorney Luoma, Richard Todd added. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet #2 Exhibit A #3 Exhibit B )(Luoma, Richard) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
