Katharina N. Blancato v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KATHARINA N. BLANCATO,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Nos. 14-70654, 14-70655
Tax Ct. No. 8754-07
Tax Ct. No. 13019-08
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from Decisions of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted May 24, 2016**
Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Katharina N. Blancato appeals pro se from the
Tax Court’s orders dismissing for failure to prosecute her petitions challenging the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s determinations of tax deficiencies for tax
years 2003 and 2004. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We
FILED
JUN 02 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes these cases are suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 3 --

review for an abuse of discretion. Noli v. Comm’r, 860 F.2d 1521, 1527 (9th Cir.
1988). We affirm.
The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Blancato’s petitions
for failure to prosecute because Blancato failed to appear at trial and was otherwise
uncooperative. See id. at 1527 (noting that “dismissal for failure properly to
prosecute will normally arise where a party fails to appear at trial”); see also T.C.
R. 123(b) (Tax Court may dismiss a case and enter a decision against a petitioner
where the petitioner fails properly to prosecute or fails to proceed as required by
the Tax Court).
Contrary to Blancato’s contention, the Tax Court did not err in lifting the
automatic stay after the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving a stipulated
settlement that terminated the stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) as to Blancato. See id.
at 1525 (discussing an automatic stay under § 362 and explaining that “the terms of
an order lifting the automatic stay are strictly construed”). We reject Blancato’s
contention that the Tax Court should have sought leave from the Bankruptcy Court
to resume proceedings.
We treat Blancato’s reply briefs as both requesting leave to file multiple
briefs and to file the briefs late, and grant the requests. The Clerk shall file the
reply briefs submitted on July 28, 2014 and August 14, 2014.
14-70655 2

-- 2 of 3 --

We reject as without merit Blancato’s contention in her reply briefs that the
Commissioner’s answering brief should be rejected as untimely.
AFFIRMED.
14-70655 3

-- 3 of 3 --