NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 22 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RUSSELL T. McADAMS, No. 20-72611
Petitioner-Appellant, Tax Ct. No. 19702-19
v.
MEMORANDUM*
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted September 14, 2021**
Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Russell T. McAdams appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order denying his
post-judgment motion for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C.
§ 7482(a). We review for an abuse of discretion. Parkinson v. Comm’r, 647 F.2d
875, 876 (9th Cir. 1981). We affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying McAdams’s post-
judgment motion for reconsideration because McAdams failed to demonstrate any
basis for such relief. See id. (“The Tax Court’s denial of a motion for
reconsideration will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of
discretion.”); see also Abatti v. Comm’r, 859 F.2d 115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) (a Tax
Court cannot reopen a case after a final decision except in the event of fraud on the
court or mutual mistake).
We do not consider McAdams’s contentions regarding the Tax Court’s
original decision because McAdams failed to file a timely notice of appeal as to
that decision. See 26 U.S.C. § 7483 (notice of appeal must be filed within 90 days
of judgment); Fed. R. App. P. 13(a)(1)(B); Tax Ct. R. 161, 162 (post-judgment
motions for reconsideration or to vacate or revise a decision must be filed within
30 days of the decision); Nordvik v. Comm’r, 67 F.3d 1489, 1493 n. 5 (9th Cir.
1995) (“[S]uccessive motions asserting the same grounds cannot be tacked
together to extend the time for filing an appeal.”).
AFFIRMED.
2 20-72611