IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF ____________________

  The United States                   )
       Respondent(s)                  ) CIVIL ACTION # ______________
                                      )
Vs.                                   )   PETITION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL            
                                      )         (Pocket Summons)
___________________                   )
Respondents                           )

Respondent, above-named petitions this court pursuant to Rule 62(d), FRCivP, for a stay of proceeding pending appeal, for the following reasons:

1.  Heretofore, the Respondents contested IRS administrative summons issued to him. Respondent came into the court, raised substantial grounds in his pleadings, argument, and evidence presented to the Court as to why the summons should not be enforced.

The Court has now ordered the result requested by the government. Respondent has filed his Notice of Appeal or is in the process of the same and requests from this court a stay of the execution of the judgment until his appeal could be heard and decided.

2.  Respondent’s appeal would be rendered ineffective without a stay and he would suffer irreparable harm in that:

    1. His privacy would be destroyed; the information sought by the government is personal, confidential; the type that should not be copied, distributed to and examined by scores of government agents.
    1. The government agents will have access to a tremendous amount of personal information, the vast majority of which has no bearing whatsoever to a legitimate use of the IRS, but would embarrass and humiliate Respondent.
    1. The Constitutional Rights of Respondent would be permanently destroyed.
    1. The information and knowledge of Respondents activities cannot be erased from the minds of agents, who would have immediate access to the records, nor could the records be removed from the agency. The facts are inescapable: once the bureaucracy gained access to Respondents’ records, the damage could not be undone, even by “all the king’s men”.

3.  A temporary stay would benefit the government and the courts, in case of taxpayer prevailing on appeal at some later date. The full legal proceeding in this matter is not complete until the appeal court has had an opportunity to examine the record. Until then, the government should not be allowed to destroy a citizen’s privacy.

4. The government would not be harmed or prejudiced in any way by a temporary stay as the records in possession of the Respondents will not be destroyed or altered. Almost all of the records sought by the summons are already in the possession of the IRS.

5. Respondent has raised legitimate and substantial issues in this case; he has made a strong showing; he is likely to prevail on the merits of the appeal, which will be filed on the following grounds:

a.       The IRS is using the civil summons to evade the traditional duty of the Grand Jury, and has abandoned any civil tax pursuant, US v. LaSalle, 98 S. Ct 2257 (1978) and plans to use these materials for a criminal prosecution, US v. Gardiner 531 F 2d 952.

b.       The IRS in connection with the Justice Department is attempting to mislead the court and gain access to Respondent’s records by trickery, deceit, and deception. US v Tweel, 550 F 2d 927.

c.       IRS Special Agents from the Criminal Investigation Division have control of the case and were the sole investigators for a long period of time US v Dahlstrum USDC Calif . dated 7-11-80.

d.       The trial court denied Respondent his entitled discovery. US v. Genser, 595 F 2d 146 (1979).

e.       The US Constitution limits the scope of the summons. US v. Holmes 614 F2d 985 (1980) and US vs. Life Science Church, No. 80-1499 (8th Cir., 15 Dec. 80).

6. Taxpayer’s Constitutional Rights depend on this court granting a stay. If not, the IRS will grab Respondent’s records from him. Then when the taxpayer files his appeal brief, the US Attorney will file a Motion to Dismiss on grounds of mootness, alleging that the government already has the records -- therefore, the citizen’s privacy is moot!

The US Court of Appeals for this district and for the other circuits have ruled in numerous cases that if the lower court does not grant the stay and the IRS gains access to the records, the taxpayer’s Constitutional rights are moot and no appeal will be allowed!

7. Consequently, the Court needs to (a) stay the execution of the mandate, or (b) enter into the record the Court determination that lack of such should not deny Respondent his due process right to appeal.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I hereby certify that on this date a copy of this pleading was mailed properly to opposing Counsel.

__________________________                                                           Date____________________
Respondent

Address:
__________________________
__________________________
________________________