Trivedi v. Commissioner, 525 F. App'x 587

Trivedis appeal pro se from Tax Court dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction over tax years 1992 and 1993.
Tax Court dismissed because petition not filed within 30 days after a notice of determination concerning a notice of lien or intent to levy.
Court relies on 26 U.S.C. § 6330(d)(1) and the one-hearing rule for CDP proceedings.
November 2010 CDP denial concerned a lien related to March 2010 and did not provide jurisdiction due to overlap with a prior CDP hearing.
October 2010 Notice of Intent to Levy and a denied Collections Appeals Program hearing were not jurisdictional bases for review; court affirmed denial to vacate dismissal and rejected remaining challenges.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Subject matter jurisdiction timing	Trivedis argue CDP denial gives jurisdiction.	Jurisdiction hinges on 6330(d)(1) timing, not CDP denial.	Dismissal proper; no jurisdiction.
CDP one-hearing rule applicability	November 2010 CDP denial supports review.	One hearing rule bars new CDP review when related to a prior matter.	No jurisdiction; CDP not proper basis.
October 2010 Notice of Intent to Levy	Notice could trigger CDP review.	No CDP determination followed; no jurisdiction.	No jurisdiction.
Appeals Program denial and judicial review	Collection Appeals Program denial should be reviewable.	CAP determinations are not CDP or § 6330 reviewable.	Not reviewable.
Motion to vacate dismissal	Court should vacate for reconsideration.	No error; arguments insufficient to merit vacatur.	Court did not abuse its discretion.

Gorospe v. Comm'r, 451 F.3d 966 (9th Cir. 2006) (Tax Court jurisdiction is limited and defined by Title 26; review after CDP determination)
Thomas v. Lewis, 945 F.2d 1119 (9th Cir. 1991) (abuse of discretion standard for denying motion to vacate)