United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO
HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter comes before the Court on Defendants' Yael
Bortnick, Bryan Stebbins, and Michael Isenberg's Motion
to Dismiss. Dkt. # 18. The remaining Defendants have joined
this Motion. Dkt. # 25. Plaintiff opposes, and the moving
Defendants have filed a Reply. Dkt. ## 35, 37. For the
reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS
Complaint in this case spans over 120 pages, does not include
line numbers or helpful paragraph breaks, and frequently
includes irrelevant legal citations and indecipherable
accusations of a nefarious conspiracy. At the very least,
Plaintiff's Complaint fails to satisfy Rule 8's
requirement of a “short and plain” statement of
his legal claims. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). However, the Court
has endeavored to decipher what it believes to be the
relevant facts, taken as true, for the purposes of resolving
the present Motion. Sanders v. Brown, 504 F.3d 903,
910 (9th Cir. 2007).
action involves a dispute between Plaintiff Mark Daviscourt,
proceeding pro se, and various officers at the
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), and various
other individuals associated with the federal government and
the office of Washington Senator Patty Murray. Dkt. # 1. The
central issue in this dispute is the IRS' attempts to
collect unpaid income tax from the 2000 calendar year from
Plaintiff and his wife. See Dkt. # 1 at Ex. 12. The
IRS audited the couple's Form 1140 and found that they
were attempting to avoid paying income tax on capital gains
from the sale of their construction business by improperly
using a tax shelter. Id. at Exs. 11-13. The IRS
attempted to collect this overdue tax, and the Daviscourts
filed for bankruptcy in 2010. See Daviscourt v. Internal
Revenue Service, Adv. No. 10-01382-TWD (Bankr. W.D.
Wash.). The Bankruptcy Court ruled that the
Daviscourts would remain liable for this unpaid tax because
they willfully attempted to evade or defeat the collection of
the tax under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(C). Id. at
Dkt. # 45.
resumed collection post-bankruptcy, assigning Revenue Officer
Steve Baker to the account in 2012. See Dkt. # 1,
Ex. 2. Daviscourt responded to Revenue Officer Baker's
collection efforts by complaining to Senator Patty
Murray's office that Baker was violating his civil
rights. Id. at 3-6, Ex. 3. Plaintiff contacted the
Taxpayer Advocate Service and invoked IRS administrative
collection due process (“CDP”) and
offer-in-compromise (“OIC”) procedures. See
generally Dkt. # 1. Plaintiff continued to
unsuccessfully oppose the IRS collection efforts through
these due process challenges in 2015, but to date has not
paid the outstanding taxes. Id. at Exs. 11, 12.
2016, following a referral by the IRS to the Justice
Department, the United States filed suit in this Court to
reduce the assessments to judgment. United States v.
Daviscourt, No. 2:16-cv-00290-RSM. United States v.
Daviscourt, No. 2:16-cv-00290-RSM; see also
Dkt. # 1, Ex. 12. On May 23, 2016, Judge Martinez entered a
default judgment against the Daviscourts for $491, 513.73
plus interest. United States v. Daviscourt, No.
2:16-cv-00290-RSM (May 13, 2016).
August 6, 2018, Plaintiff Mark Daviscourt filed the operative
Complaint in this lawsuit against a large number of federal
government individuals. Dkt. # 1. Most of the Defendants
named in the caption of this Complaint are current or former
employees of the IRS (the “IRS Defendants”) who
were purportedly involved in the collection attempts against
Plaintiff or responded to Plaintiff's requests for
relief. See generally Dkt. # 1. Other defendants are
with Treasury, Justice Department, or Senator Patty
Murray's staff. Id.
• Steve Baker, Revenue Officer;
• Eric Smith, Collection Supervisor;
• Gwannette M. Claybrook, Acting Director, Western Area
• Patricia L. Davis, Advisor;
• Kimberly Lewis, Settlement Officer;
• As-yet unknown agents, officers and officials of the
Office of Appeals;
• Ann T. Brown, Operations Manager, Centralized Offers
in Compromise ...