USCA1 Opinion
November 29, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 93-1545
JOHN LARNER,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT
[Hon. L. W. Hamblen, Jr., Chief Judge]
___________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Selya, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
John Larner on brief pro se.
___________
Michael L. Paup, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Gary R.
_________________ _______
Allen, Gilbert S. Rothenberg and Janice B. Geier, Attorneys, Tax
_____ ______________________ ________________
Division, Department of Justice, on brief for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. We have reviewed the parties' briefs
__________
and the record on appeal. We affirm the judgment of the tax
court essentially for the reasons stated in the order of
dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, dated March 8, 1993. We
add only that our colleagues in the Seventh and Eleventh
Circuits have rejected the same argument proffered by
appellant and have concluded that "[i]t is apparent from the
numerous references to `United States mail' in the statute
and regulations that section 7502 is intended to apply only
to mail delivered by the United States Postal Service and not
also to items delivered by a private delivery service."
Pugsley v. Commissioner, 749 F.2d 691, 693 (11th Cir. 1985)
_______ ____________
(footnote omitted), quoted in Petrulis v. Commissioner, 938
_________ ________ ____________
F.2d 78, 79-80 (7th Cir. 1991).