Attorney-at-Law

COME FROM AWAY – NOT

In Uncategorized on 04/20/2026 at 12:08

Most motions to proceed remotely fail for mootness, either jurisdictional footfaults or stipouts. Fullview, Inc., Docket No. 16901-23, filed 4/20/26, applies Rule 140(b) to a motion made three (count ’em, three) weeks before trial, to which IRS successfully objects.

Fullview claims its request for trial in San Diego was a mistake, as its representative lives near San Francisco.

“Respondent objects to petitioner’s Motion stating that (a) petitioner has had multiple opportunities over the past three years since petitioner filed the petition to identify the mistake and has failed to do so, (b) petitioner’s internet has frozen on numerous occasions when virtually conferencing with respondent, and (c) because the primary issues for this case are document intensive, the trial is not conducive to a virtual proceeding.” Order, at p. 1.

Judge Benjamin A. (“Trey”) Guider, III, tells Fullview to show up in San Diego.

Rule 140(b) of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure allows a party to move to change the place of trial, but states that if the ‘motion [is] made after the notice setting the case for trial is served[, it] may be deemed dilatory and may be denied unless the ground therefor arose during that period or there was good reason for not making the motion sooner.’ Petitioner’s reasons for requesting a remote proceeding do not meet this standard and seemingly did not arise between our Order setting this case for trial and petitioner’s Motion to Proceed Remotely. And respondent has raised convincing objections.” Order, at p. 1. 

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.