U.S. v. LEE, 2:12-cv-01994-GMN-PAL. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20141120g52
Visitors: 19
Filed: Nov. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2014
Summary: ORDER GLORIA M. NAVARRO, Chief District Judge. Before the Court is Petitioner's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 42) and supporting Memorandum and Declaration (ECF Nos. 43 and 44). Respondent filed a Response in Opposition to Petitioner's Motion (ECF No. 48), and Petitioner filed its Reply (ECF No. 51). The Court has read the pleadings filed by the parties, and as the Petitioner sets forth in its Motion to Dismiss, the Respondent has complied with the IRS summons and therefore the United States see
Summary: ORDER GLORIA M. NAVARRO, Chief District Judge. Before the Court is Petitioner's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 42) and supporting Memorandum and Declaration (ECF Nos. 43 and 44). Respondent filed a Response in Opposition to Petitioner's Motion (ECF No. 48), and Petitioner filed its Reply (ECF No. 51). The Court has read the pleadings filed by the parties, and as the Petitioner sets forth in its Motion to Dismiss, the Respondent has complied with the IRS summons and therefore the United States seek..
More
ORDER
GLORIA M. NAVARRO, Chief District Judge.
Before the Court is Petitioner's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 42) and supporting Memorandum and Declaration (ECF Nos. 43 and 44). Respondent filed a Response in Opposition to Petitioner's Motion (ECF No. 48), and Petitioner filed its Reply (ECF No. 51).
The Court has read the pleadings filed by the parties, and as the Petitioner sets forth in its Motion to Dismiss, the Respondent has complied with the IRS summons and therefore the United States seeks no further relief from this Court. However, as the Petitioner also states, the Respondent refuses to stipulate to the dismissal of this action. The Court agrees with the Petitioner that since there is nothing further to prosecute, dismissal of this action is appropriate. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 42) is hereby GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Stay (ECF No. 45), and the Motion to Strike (ECF No. 55), are hereby DENIED as moot.
The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case.
Source: Leagle
