FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 02 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHRIS CONNOLLY, No. 10-70757
Petitioner - Appellant, Tax Ct. No. 10487-08
v.
MEMORANDUM *
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted October 25, 2011 **
Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Chris Connolly, an attorney, appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order
granting the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s motion to dismiss Connolly’s
petition contesting a notice of deficiency concerning income tax liabilities for tax
years 2004 and 2005. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We
*
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).
review for an abuse of discretion a Tax Court’s decision to deny a motion to
continue, Woods v. Saturn Distribution Corp., 78 F.3d 424, 427 (9th Cir. 1996),
and to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution, Edelson v. Comm’r, 829 F.2d 828,
831 (9th Cir. 1987). We affirm.
The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in denying Connolly’s untimely
motion to continue because Connolly had ample opportunity to collect necessary
documents, including receiving a prior continuance, and had been warned that she
was required to be prepared at trial. See Woods, 78 F.3d at 427 (decision to deny a
continuance will not be reversed except upon a showing of clear abuse); see also
Tax Ct. R. 133 (continuance motions will be granted only in exceptional
circumstances, and those filed within 30 days of trial are generally considered
dilatory).
The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Connolly’s petition
for failure to prosecute because Connolly was unwilling to enter into a stipulation,
to provide necessary documentation to the Commissioner or the court before or
during trial, or to proceed with her case at trial. See Tax Ct. R. 123(b); Edelson,
829 F.2d at 831 (Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing taxpayers’
petitions for failure to prosecute where taxpayers had, among other things, failed to
produce records, to stipulate, and to appear for trial); see also Noli v. Comm’r, 860
2 10-70757
F.2d 1521, 1527 (9th Cir. 1988) (a case may properly be dismissed for lack of
prosecution although the petitioner has appeared).
Connolly’s remaining contentions, including those concerning the statute of
limitations, are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
3 10-70757