Maehr v. United States

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (DKT. #45) AND DEFENDANT'S RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. #82)

          N. Reid Neureiter, United States Magistrate Judge.

         N. Reid Neureiter United State Magistrate Judge

         This case is before the Court pursuant to Orders (Dkt. #46 & #83) issued by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer referring Plaintiff Jeffrey T. Maehr's Opposed Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. #45) and Defendant United States' Renewed Motion to Dismiss. (Dkt. #82.) The Court has carefully considered the motions, responses (Dkt. #54 & #84), replies (Dkt. #80 & #85), and the United States' sur-reply. (Dkt. #89.) On July 22, 2019, the Court heard argument on the subject motions. (See Dkt. #90.) The Court has taken judicial notice of the Court's file, considered the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and case law, and recommends Plaintiff's Opposed Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. #45) be denied and Defendant's Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #82) be granted.

         I. BACKGROUND

         a. Procedural History

         Mr. Maehr, proceeding pro se, ^[1] initiated this lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) on September 4, 2018. (Dkt. #1.) On September 7, 2018, Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher identified various pleading deficiencies and ordered Mr. Maehr to file an amended complaint (Dkt. #5), which Mr. Maehr did on December 3, 2018. (Dkt. #8.) The First Amended Complaint was also deemed deficient (Dkt. #10), but Mr. Maehr's Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. #14) was drawn to Chief Judge Brimmer and me. (Dkt. #15.)

         On February 28, 2019, Mr. Maehr filed the subject preliminary injunction motion. (Dkt. #45.) On March 11, 2019, the United States moved to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. (Dkt. #51.) Mr. Maehr was given leave to further amend his complaint (see Dkt. #77), and the United States renewed the subject motion (Dkt. #82) to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”). (Dkt. #70.) On May 17, 2019, Mr. Maehr filed, without leave of Court, an “Addendum to Amended Brief” (the “Addendum”). (Dkt. #78.) The United States construed the two filings as a single pleading and as the operative complaint, and addressed both in its motion to dismiss. For the sake of completeness and convenience, the Court will do likewise. Each parties' motion is now ripe for review.

         b. Mr. Maehr's Allegations

         Mr. Maehr has been litigating the validity of his tax liability for many years, and before many different courts. (See Dkt. #82 at 1 n.1 (collecting cases).) In this lawsuit, Mr. Maehr challenges the IRS's tax assessment for the 2003-06 tax years. He alleges that the assessment “is erroneous due to [the IRS] manufacturing frivolous assessment figures which have conflicted over the years, ” and that he “has firsthand knowledge of personal bank business, social security administration, and other asset records to dispute the original egregious and unconscionable assessment.” (Dkt. #70 ¶ 3) (emphases omitted.) Although Mr. Maehr concedes that he “brought, eventually over several years, multiple suits challenging the assessment, ” he claims that he was “continually” denied due process. (Id. ¶¶ 8-9.)

         Mr. Maehr asserts four claims for relief. First, he alleges that he has been denied “pre-assessment third party summonsed documents” in the IRS's possession during past proceedings, including the government's garnishment of Mr. Maehr's Social Security payments. (Id. ¶¶ 14-18.) Accordingly, he requests that the Court order the United States to “produce the simple, pre-assessment documents it claims it has and claims it used to assess” him. (Id. ¶ 31.)

         Mr. Maehr's second claim for relief appears to be a request for “compensatory and punitive damages” against the United States. (Id. ¶ 27.) Similarly, his third claim for relief requests an award of attorney fees and costs “and/or . . . whatever this honorable court deems right, just and fair to compensate Plaintiff for the depravation [sic] of rights, finances, living, health and emotional state for well over ten years.” (Id. ¶¶ 29-30.)

         Finally, in the Addendum, Mr. Maehr alleges that the United States possesses an “‘Individual Master File' . . . whereby Defendant's records and documentation of all assessments and all elements related to such assessments are to be part of Defendant's lawful records.” (Dkt. #78 ¶ 1.) He asks the Court to order the United States to provide him with this file, which he claims “likely will show that the assessment is fraudulent[.]” (Id. ¶ 2.)

         II. ANALYSIS

         a. United States' Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. ...