resulted in involuntary servitude responding to the illegal activities of the Defendants and his coworkers. Plaintiffs thereby request of this honorable court the restitution called laims against Revenue Agent Sothen and his co-workers in their official capacities, I agree that the United States must be substituted as the proper defendant. The Petition also names the Internal Revenue Service as a defendant. The Internal Revenue Service is not an entity capable of being sued. Posey v. United States Dept. of the Treasury—Internal Revenue Service, 156 B.R. 910, 917 (W.D.N.Y.1993)(stating that “suit against the IRS or the Treasury Department is not available in federal court”); Krouse v. United States Government Treasury Dept. Internal Revenue Service, 380 F.Supp. 219, 221 (C.D.Cal.1974) (<HOLDING>). A suit purporting to bring claims against the
holding that the trial court should have dismissed the employees breach of contract claim holding that if the federal claims are dismissed before trial  the state claims should be dismissed as well holding that the department of the treasury and the internal revenue service are not entities subject to suit and they should be dismissed holding that district court appropriately dismissed suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when the case was moot holding that 1 the njcfa applies to corporations and other business entities when they are acting as consumers because business entities are considered a person under the act and no reason exists to treat it differently and 2 to be a consumer in respect to a transaction the business entity must be one who uses the goods and thereby diminishes their economic utility