THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF _________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                     )
                                              )
             Petitioner                       )
                                              )      Civil Action No.
     v.                                       ) 
                                              )      2:06-CV-00299-XXX 
                                              )
Russell Patriot and                           )
René Patriot,                                 )
                                              )
            Respondent                        )

MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND THE JUDGEMENT

Pursuant to Rule 59e. of the FRCivP, Defendant, Russell M. Patriot, files his Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment, based on the following grounds:

1. This honorable court on March 19, 2007 handed out this order approving levy on personal residence of Defendant and granting the request of the IRS. Patriot requests this court alter this judgment because of the following reasons.

2. Patriot hereby withdraws and recants all of his issues, grounds and positions using arguments that are classified by the IRS as frivolous, groundless and merit less. Patriot now realizes that people who assisted him and advised him where unfamiliar with the rules and proper procedures in court and had much room for improvement. Even though the advice and pleadings were unacceptable to the courts, Patriot paid them large sums of money.

3. Patriot now has someone helping him who will show him how to follow rules, procedures and proper pleadings. Patriot will also hire local member of the federal bar to ensure that this case will follow the rules of this court.

4. The IRC is so complex and confusing nobody knows what it says. Patriot made a good faith effort to obey the tax laws and the rules of the court. However my paid advisors were advising me to use arguments and positions that have been ruled against by the federal judiciary in thousands of cases. My tax consultants did not tell me that my positions were unacceptable to this court.

5. The Notice of Federal Tax Lien which is the subject of this case is invalid and unenforceable because it violates the new requirements of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights II which is codified in IRC 6320 which provides that the copy of the NFTL must be sent to the taxpayer within 5 business days after filing the NFTL. Further 6320 requires that within 5 business days of the NFTL being filed, the tax collectors must send the taxpayer a copy of his notice of collection hearing. These 2 requirements are mandatory under the provisions of the US Congress.

6. The IRS did not send Patriot these two required notices within the time period. Further the IRS does not have any proof of mailing these two vital documents.

7. The elected representatives of the People sitting in Congress have an enacted a statute that requires, mandates that the IRS notify the Taxpayers of this extremely important filing. This law was passed because the IRS had a long history of filing stealth tax liens and ruining honest businessmen. Due to the vast ramifications of a tax lien, Congress required the tax collectors to notify the owner of the property very quickly.

Congress meant for this statute to be enforced and clearly meant that the lien would be invalid absent strict adherence to the statute. The IRS holds taxpayers to a very strict, merciless, standard without leeway. These same standards should be applied to the tax Service. Here the collection agents violated an act of Congress.

8. Since the lien is invalid therefore this lawsuit is improper and the judge’s order based on misinformation from the IRS. The best course of action is to reopen this case so Patriot can prove to this court that mandatory statutory requirements were violated.

9. Congress passed a law to ensure the tax beauracrats to meet certain standards. Why did Congress pass these laws? The public opinion experts in Congress wanted to improve the public image of the tax collectors and to lessen the collateral damage of the tax system. Therefore the IRS would benefit if this case was reopened and the invalid liens corrected.

10. The IRC is so complex and confusing nobody knows what it says. Patriot made a good faith effort to obey the tax laws and the rules of the court. However my paid advisors were advising me to use arguments and positions that have been ruled against by the federal judges in thousands of cases. My tax consultants did not tell me that my positions were unacceptable to this court.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, Respondent respectfully requests the Court to grant Patriot’s Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I do hereby certify that on this date I properly sent a copy of this pleading to opposing attorney.

_____________________________ This 23rd day of March, 2007

Russell Patriot
Respondent Pro Se

1776 Patriot Way,
Washington, USA