J.B. v. United States, 916 F.3d 1161

J.B. and P.B., elderly taxpayers, were selected for a 2011 IRS National Research Program (NRP) audit; J.B. is a court‑appointed capital defense attorney.
The IRS mailed an introductory audit letter that included Publication 1 (Taxpayer Bill of Rights) warning generally that the IRS "may" contact third parties.
Two years later the IRS issued summonses to the California Supreme Court seeking J.B.’s billing statements and invoices; the couple learned of the third‑party contact only after service on their daughter and petitioned to quash.
The district court granted the petition to quash the 2011 summons, holding Publication 1 alone did not satisfy I.R.C. § 7602(c)(1)’s requirement of “reasonable notice in advance.”
The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo whether § 7602(c)(1) requires more than a general publication and affirmed the quash, applying a totality‑of‑the‑circumstances, reasonableness standard.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Meaning of “reasonable notice in advance” under I.R.C. § 7602(c)(1)	§7602(c)(1) requires notice calculated to apprise and give a meaningful opportunity to respond	The statutory phrase permits a categorical/general notice (Publication 1) in all cases	Court: "reasonable notice" means notice reasonably calculated, under all circumstances, to apprise interested parties and afford a meaningful opportunity to resolve issues before third‑party contacts are made
Whether Publication 1 mailed here satisfied §7602(c)(1)	Publication 1 suffices as advance notice	Publication 1 sufficed and requiring more specific notice would render §7602(c)(2) superfluous	Court: Publication 1 alone was not reasonable here; under the facts (two‑year gap, sensitive employer contact, ongoing litigation, privileged records requested) IRS failed to provide adequate advance notice

Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006) (notice must be reasonably calculated under all circumstances to apprise interested parties)
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950) (foundational standard for adequacy of notice)
Powell v. United States, 379 U.S. 48 (1964) (four‑part test for enforcing IRS administrative summons)
Dusenbery v. United States, 534 U.S. 161 (2002) (notice standards in administrative contexts)
Greene v. Lindsey, 456 U.S. 444 (1982) (notice adequacy to affected parties)
A.H. Phillips, Inc. v. Walling, 324 U.S. 490 (1945) (construe statutory exceptions narrowly in favor of protected interests)
TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U.S. 19 (2001) (avoid statutory interpretations that render other provisions superfluous)
Robinson v. Hanrahan, 409 U.S. 38 (1972) (account for unique recipient circumstances when assessing notice)
Covey v. Town of Somers, 351 U.S. 141 (1956) (notice sufficiency may require additional steps based on recipient information)