Rosner v. United States

Document and posture

The provided text is a September 7, 2021 letter from the United States to Judge John G. Koeltl. It requests a conference before the government files an anticipated motion for partial summary judgment. The text does not contain a court opinion, an order, or a ruling on that request.

Tax-refund claims

The letter states that Joshua Rosner seeks refunds for alleged tax overpayments for the 2006 and 2008 tax years. The United States planned to seek summary judgment on the 2006 refund claim, arguing that Rosner filed the lawsuit after the deadline in 26 U.S.C. § 6532(a)(1), which generally requires a tax-refund lawsuit to be filed within two years after the mailing of a notice disallowing the claim.

The letter acknowledges that the court had previously held that this deadline could be extended in appropriate circumstances. The government argued, however, that such an extension—called equitable tolling—is available only in rare and exceptional circumstances. Although Rosner’s complaint alleged post-traumatic stress disorder, the government pointed to evidence that, during the relevant period, he pursued an administrative appeal through representatives, hired a law firm for certain tax matters, appeared on television programs, and wrote an article. The government argued that these activities showed he was not so incapacitated that he could not protect his rights.

The United States stated that it did not intend to seek summary judgment on the 2008 refund claim. It said that claim would require resolution of whether Rosner was unable to manage his financial affairs because of a disability during the relevant period, and that it was prepared to try that issue after the proposed motion was resolved.

Records request

The government also addressed what it described as Rosner’s Freedom of Information Act claims concerning an April 2016 request to the Internal Revenue Service for records about him for tax years 2006 through 2010. It argued that the agency had produced all records identified through its searches, subject to limited redactions concerning sensitive information about other individuals. The government further argued that the agency’s search was reasonable because it searched, among other places, Rosner’s records at the appropriate Internal Revenue Service Federal Records Center.

Disposition

No disposition appears in the provided text. Judge Koeltl did not grant, deny, or otherwise rule on the government’s anticipated motion in this document. The government said it remained willing to meet with Rosner to narrow or resolve any remaining records-request issues.