Wfoe4-Ke.tr cl collate c^m-duofe, <3uaA swccessfwA busn^e sswiaw ou/rt€.T of ex small
0-CCOuvvHincj ctffevr jpreiwelmo^ sev/evcv) a.u.di'fs cxW jr\ne Xnfe/'Ha l
Rev/ewu-e Service -for Wis cUemfs av\A sabs 'e^iAew.-fly beu-ig. cUcnp^-ed u?rbh
\>« vaVC \ftobbery <oml cvH-e^pfexl murder of -peA^'CeA officer's ~"
fw<Afcf iwevvV e*vvd Wav/vvvej Wes p^so^cA awA bixsmess property served cund
'r^^" CAViae ^ by +We G-o'/emyncesir cxwi offe-vr uAsfsfiwejj orv 'represevft-tuvao
himself a.v\<A Ccxnse$ue<AfbetW^ foawd frvcompefeviW ft> sfcmd frua-\
becceuse o-f o. m-eiA-VcA <d.tse<ts>c or ckefecV ^dLelus usiacl I. dfsov-cketr^ oend
Cowv^f-H-ed Wo tV\e CttsWy of tW-e AfWney <3-ey>emA -fbir Wosprhxf
t&k TT-a.-bioiA awd freest we? »a-Vj cavi be f?me Wfed fr<5»vn brtUoFW
clcW^o^ WVve reWw of Vfoe ^guiWWvrf of «l\ Wis property
OiinA -Wve pciyiwe^vW of- aU Wes re^iffuftovA ©tcW of Wfs Treasury Offsef
Prc^ra^ (jof) <xcc &u\k\Js ^v/evv fWo^W he filed vnoVfows un-Hun awd oufstde
WKe S'VcN.WVe of- Vvwu.-Va.'VupiA.s for sueW refu.rirv avA po-yvwewf cmA evevv WW ka^U
fhe 0Me.r of G&mwvfWvHevcV of dcxvuxAry 3y %oo3 ho-s nei/er beem vacct-Ved
or se+ ^.svde fb -V-Vus day <xs CawvvncmdeA by I?un. c\ 15 Cotju^-t
cua .
«C § 43.4.1(e) ? u.s

Whether a college graduate and successful businessman owner of a small accounting firm, who prevailed in several audits at the Internal Revenue Service for his clients and subsequently being charged with bank robbery and attempted murder of federal officers in a 15-count indictment and having his personal and business property seized and retained by the Government and after insisting on representing himself and consequently being found incompetent to stand trial because of a mental disease or defect (delusional disorder) and committed to the custody of the Attorney General for his hospitalization and treatment, can be time-barred from bringing an action for the return of the equivalent of all monies seized and the payment of all his restitution out of his Treasury Offset Program (TOP) account, even though he filed motions within and outside the statute of limitations for such return and payment and even though the Order of commitment of January 31, 2003 has never been vacated or set aside to this day as commanded by 18 U.S.C. 4247(h)?