FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 1 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-16278
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:05-cv-02176-MCE-
CMK
v.
LEONE CAREY; et al., MEMORANDUM *
Defendants,
and
JOHN CAREY; et al.,
Applicants for Intervention -
Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
John Carey, Byron Carey, and George Carey (“the Careys”) appeal pro se
from the district court’s order denying their motion to intervene in the
government’s action to foreclose federal tax liens against Michael and Leone
Carey. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. League
of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Wilson, 131 F.3d 1297, 1302 (9th Cir. 1997). We
affirm.
The district court properly concluded that the Careys’ motion to intervene
was untimely because it was filed nearly three years after the district court granted
summary judgment, and the Careys provided no explanation for their delay. See
id. at 1302-07 (motion was untimely where there was a twenty-seven month delay,
which the intervenor failed adequately to explain).
Contrary to the Careys’ contentions, the district court had jurisdiction. See
26 U.S.C. § 7403(a), (c) (providing for jurisdiction over cases by the United States
to enforce tax liens against a debtor’s property); 26 U.S.C. § 7402(a) (providing
district courts with jurisdiction to issue writs necessary to enforce the internal
revenue laws).
The Careys’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 10-16278