(PS) Matranga v. Internal Revenue Service, 2:11-cv-01604

Plaintiff Matranga filed a June 14, 2011 complaint seeking a tax refund of $11,704 related to non-taxable disability income.
Defendant IRS moved on Sept. 29, 2011 to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) and failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, asserted an administrative refund dispute but did not clearly establish a jurisdictional basis.
The court noted the Civil Cover Sheet designated the U.S. Government as a party, but the United States sovereign immunity requires explicit waiver by Congress for suit against federal agencies.
Plaintiff filed a letter (May 18, 2011) and amended 2004 tax return (Apr. 10, 2009) referenced in the record; the court considered extrinsic evidence on jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the claim.	Matranga argues for a federal claim for a tax refund.	IRS contends no jurisdiction without a waiver of sovereign immunity and proper statutory basis.	Dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
Whether the United States has waived sovereign immunity for this claim.	Matranga relies on 28 U.S.C. §1346(a)(1) as a waiver.	Waiver must be unequivocally expressed; mere agency actions do not waive immunity.	No waiver established; dismissal appropriate.
Whether the claim is time-barred under 26 U.S.C. §7422(a) and §6511(a).	Matranga seeks a refund for 2004 tax liability.	Amended 2004 return filed 4/10/2009 was not timely per §6511(a).	Claim untimely; cannot proceed in court.
Whether leave to amend should be granted.			Leave to amend denied as futile.

Block v. North Dakota ex rel. Bd. of Univ. & Sch. Lands, 461 U.S. 273 (U.S. 1983) (sovereign immunity requires congressional consent to sue the United States)
Gerritsen v. Consulado General de Mexico, 989 F.2d 340 (9th Cir. 1993) (agency immunity; no suit against federal agency without waiver)
United States v. Park Place Associates, Ltd., 563 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2009) (waiver must be explicit; jurisdictional analysis governs suit against U.S.)
United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., 553 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2008) (claims for refund must be filed with IRS before suit; timing under §7422(a) and §6511(a))
McCarthy v. United States, 850 F.2d 558 (9th Cir. 1988) (court may review extrinsic evidence on jurisdictional challenges)
Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Cal. State Bd. of Equalization, 858 F.2d 1376 (9th Cir. 1988) (jurisdiction is threshold; lack of jurisdiction defeats merits)