Rather hard to sparkle on the Friday before Labor Day, with the thermometer in the mid-eighties and the humidity at palpable. It’s just past six p.m., EDST, and my personal rule is that, if I’m not up with a post by that hour (local time), I’ve lost the day.

So I am casting about for something wherewith to sparkle, and candor compels me to state there ain’t a lot.

It seems that most of the 400 Second Street, NW, Glasshousers have hit the trail for barbecue.

The Ogden Sunseteers have unloaded Publications 5232 and 5232-A, each a one-page beginner’s guide to the giant slalom and moguls of Section 7623. To encourage potential blowers, the Ogden crew provides the following: “It frequently takes 5 to 7 years, or more, for the Whistleblower Office to make a decision about a claim.” Somewhat reminiscent of the old tale about the Czar, the despised one, the poodle dog and the French language.

But read it all for yourselves. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5232.pdf and http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5232a.pdf

The latter is an explanation of what happens to a claims for a whistleblower award. In further explication thereof, see Thomas Heggen’s 1946 novel Mr. Roberts, specifically that portion relating to how Mr Roberts imagined his applications for transfer were treated by Navy Bureau of Personnel.

But that Obliging Jurist, Judge David Gustafson, bless him, has a designated hitter, Avet Coach Corp., Docket No. 25052-07L, filed 9/4/15.

Basically, petitioner’s counsel bails, to the unanimous agreement of all parties. But counsel bails after a telephone conference initiated by Judge Gustafson, when IRS moved for summary J and no answer came from petitioner or counsel aforesaid.

After said teleconfab, counsel bailed by mail. Judge Gustafson gets testy, which is happening more often, it seems; I hope these rulebreakers aren’t wearing him down.

“…after the Court initiated a telephone conference with counsel for both parties, petitioner’s counsel mailed… a motion to withdraw as counsel. (This mailing was not in compliance with the Court’s procedures requiring electronic filing. As a result, the undersigned judge’s receipt of the motion was delayed by several days. Petitioner’s counsel is admonished to comply with the Court’s procedures in the future.) The motion states that neither petitioner nor respondent objects to the motion to withdraw.” Order, at p. 1.

So Amvet will appear by an officer, to whom Judge Gustafson addresses one of his shotgun orders, directing said officer to answer IRS’s summary J motion a week before calendar call, at which said calendar call the motion will be argued. And it’s answer and argue, or go home.

And as said calendar call is coming to a venue near me, I shall show up thereat, notwithstanding my midnight departure next day for Berlin and the Eisbären, the First Floor Restaurant and KaDeWe.

Cain’t hardly wait.