wo

:C.-I
UQJ
W:!:
I:A::J



..100\
oc:::
Q c:.!!!
zoe:
........
CIJ:!
.!: :::
u..C:IIJ
0
Vlu
ttl
(1):;!:0

UoQJ

u. .
oz


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Randolf Krbechek (SBN 143120)
LAW OFFICES OF RANDOLF KRBECHEK
9477 N. Fort Washington Road, Suite 104
Fresno, California 93730
Telephone: (559) 434-4500
Facsimile: (559) 434-4554
Email: rkrbechek@msn.com
Attorneys for Steven Booth and Louise Booth
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
STEVEN BOOTH and LOUISE BOOTH, )
Plaintiffs,
v .
)
)
)
)
l
)
)
Claiming Any Legal or Equitable Right, )
Title, Estate, Lien or Interest in the )
MICHAEL SCOTT IOANE,
ACACIA CORPORATE
MANAGEMENT LLC, Does 1-25,
inclusive; and Alf Persons Unknown
Property Described in the Complaint )
Adverse to Plaintiffs' Title or Any Cloud)
Upon Plaintiffs' Title Thereto, Named )
Herein as Does 26 through 50, inclusive, )
Defendants.
)
)
Case No. CV F 12-0171 AWl GSA
REPLY TO UNITED STATES'
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO
DISMISS
Date: May 21,2012
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Dept: 10
21 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION.
22
23 Steven Booth and Louise Booth respectfully submit their Reply to United States'
24 Opposition to Motion to Dismiss as follows:
25 I.
26
QuiET TITLE AcTION SHOULD NoT BE DISMISSED
In the United States' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, the federal government
27 asks this court to dismiss the Booths' pending quiet title action, on the grounds that it
28 fails to name the United States as a defendant and therefore "is defective in failing to
1
Reply to United States' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
1 include a necessary party. The action should be dismissed without prejudice for failing
2 to name the United States, and to avoid a multiplicity of actions." United States'
3 Opposition, page 4, lines 18-20.
4 Such request should be denied. The Booths seek independent relief as against
5 Ioane and Acacia Management. The Booths do not seek any relief as against the
6 federal government, and do not contest the tax liens filed against the properties. By
7 their lawsuit, the Booths seek to have title restored to them so that they can list and
8 market the property independently (obviously, with the consent of the government),
9 instead of having a forced sale conducted by the government.
10 The Booths hope that such a private sale will achieve a greater return, and
11 perhaps avoid the necessity of selling all of the properties to satisfy the federal tax debt
12 owed by the Booths.
13 Thus, the relief sought by the Booths in their quiet title action is complementary
14 to the relief sought by the federal government. It may be appropriate for the court to
15 reconsider its denial of the government's motion for consolidation, given this
16 explanation of the objectives in the quiet title action filed by Mr. and Mrs. Booth.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DATED: May 4, 2012. LAW OFFICES OF RANDOLF KRBECHEK
B y : ~ ~ ~
2
Attorneys for Steven Booth and
Louise Booth
Reply to United States' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
1
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
3 ) ss.
COUNTY OF FRESNO )
4
I am employed in the County of Fresno, State of California. I am over the age of
5 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 9477 N. Fort
Washington Road, Suite 104, Fresno, CA 93730.
6
On May 4, 2012, I served the foregoing document(s) described as REPLY TO
7 UNITED STATES' OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS by placing (X) true copies ()
the original thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows on the below-
8 named in this action:
9
10
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(X)
William McPike, Esq.
257 East Bellevue Road #188
Atwater, CA 95301
G. Patrick Jennings, Esq.
Trial Attorneys, Tax Division
U.S. De_partment of Justice
Post Office Box 683
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0683
(BY MAIL) I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and
erocessing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be
aeposited with the u.s. postal service on that same day with postage thereon
fully prepaid at Fresno, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am
aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal
cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of
deposit for mailing in affidavit.
(BY OVERNIGHT MAIL) I caused such envelope(s) to be deposited in the
United Parcel Service overnight mail box at Fresno, California.
(STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the foregoing is true and correct.
(FEDERAL) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of
this court at whose direction the service was made.
Executed on May 4, 2012, at Fresno, California.
3
Reply to United States' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss