IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-40388
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ERNESTO G. MORALEZ, JR.;
BERTHA H. MORALEZ,
Defendants-Appellants.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-95-CV-149
- - - - - - - - - -
February 20, 1997
Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ernesto and Bertha Moralez appeal the district court’s
judgment for the Government following bench trial awarding the
Government possession of the Moralezes’ property after a forced
sale of their property to the Government as partial payment of
the tax assessment owed by the Moralezes. The Moralezes argue
for the first time on appeal that they did not receive proper
service of the notice of sale of their property as directed by 26
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-40388
- 2 -
U.S.C. § 6335. This issue is reviewed for plain error. See
Highlands Ins. Co. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 27 F.3d 1027,
1031-32 (5th Cir. 1994).
The Government’s action of leaving the notice of public
auction sale at the Moralezes residence, the property in
question, complies with the requirements of § 6335(a) and (b).
26 U.S.C. § 6335(a) & (b); see also Reece v. Scoggins, 506 F.2d
967, 970-71 (5th Cir. 1975). Also, the Government was not
required to send the seized property sale report to the Moralezes
after the sale, despite the Moralezes’ contention at trial that
the Government should have hand-delivered the document to them.
Skipwith v. Gover, 868 F. Supp. 400, 404 & n.3 (D. Mass. 1994).
Because the Moralezes’ argument of error is wholly without
merit, their appeal is frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d
215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it
is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
We caution the Moralezes that any additional frivolous
appeals filed by them or on their behalf will invite the
imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, the Moralezes are
further cautioned to review all pending appeals to ensure that
they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING GIVEN.