Trial Calendar: Philadelphia, PA
Date: June 1, 2009

PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM FOR: Petitioner, Jacqueline Patriot

NAME OF CASE: DOCKET NO: 112xxx
Jacqueline Patriot, Petitioner
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent

ATTORNEYS:
Petitioner: pro se
Tel. No: ( ) --- -----

Respondent: Kristina Rico, Attorney
Office of District Counsel

AMOUNTS IN DISPUTE:
Year(s)/Period(s) Deficiencies/Liabilities Additions/Penalties
NA (CDPH Case) NA (CDPH Case) NA (CDPH Case)

STATUS OF CASE:
Probable Settlement _____ Probable Trial _____ Definite Trial X

CURRENT ESTIMATE OF TRIAL TIME: Two hours

MOTIONS YOU EXPECT TO MAKE: Damages under IRC 6673
Motion for Remand

STATUS OF STIPULATION OF FACTS: Completed _____ In Process X

ISSUES: 1. Petitioner raised some non-frivolous arguements.
2. Petitioner valid positions were and are authorized byCongress.
3. Commissioner should pay damages for denying face-to-face hearing.
4. Petitioner is entitled to a face-to-face conference.
5. Petitioner has met all the qualifications for an in-person hearing.
6. Only Congress can set the pre-conditions for a face-to-face conference.
7. Exparte Communication by Appeals Officer
8. Prior Involvement by Appeals Officer
9. No Notice of Deficiency for Tax Year 2002.
10.Other issues raised in the Petition.

WITNESS(ES) YOU EXPECT TO CALL: None at this Time

SUMMARY OF FACTS: The facts are listed on Petitioner’s Collection Due Process Request Letter (CDPH), Petitioner’s Petition and Petitioner’s Motion in Opposition to Partial Summary Judgement
Narrative: Petitioner sent letter(s)s requesting a Collection Due Process Hearing pursuant to 6330 / 6320 and were timely posted for delivery. I was assigned a Settlement Officer, Susan Vuicich who had prior involvement for the subject years, and further; Ms. Vuicich appears to have been involved in ExParte Communication with the “Appeals Team” and the “Appeals Team Manager”, Lawrence Phillips, and further; the Notice of Deficiency for year ending December 31, 2002 was mailed to an incorrect, disinterest party and to the incorrect address, knowing that the address was not valid and was not the last known address for Petitioner, and further; inappropriate harassing conduct of Susan Vuicich inflicting emotional distress and physical illness, and further refusal/denial of face-to-face hearing, and further; denial by Settlement Officer to allow Petitioner to audio tape to create an accurate record. (Go back and read....Opp to summary judgement)

Petitioner’s Supplement to Petition which is hereby incorporated by reference.

BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF LEGAL AUTHORITIES:
IRC §§6330 / 6320
IRS § 7521

Marrett v. CIR, Docket No 4048-06, decided 7 Jul 2006
Shell v. CIR, Docket No 20188-05L, decided 31 May 2006
Nelson v. CIR, Docket No 13212-05L, decided 7 November 2005
Keene v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. No. 2 Docket No. 11604-02L, filed 8 july 2003
Calafati v. CIR, Docket No. 17529-03L, filed December 26, 2006
Tatum v. CIR, Docket No. 1126-01L
Simien
Drake v. Commissioner, 125 T.C. 9, 14-15 (2005)

EVIDENTIARY PROBLEMS: Unknown at this time

____________________________________
Date

____________________________________
Petitioner

Return to: Office of the Clerk and Judge David Gustafson
United States Tax Court
400 Second-Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20217