Boaz appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his action for failure to state a claim and denial of his motion for rehearing. Boaz contends that the Internal Revenue Service's assessment and levy of a penalty for filing a false W-4 form and the district court's dismissal of his action violated (1) his due process right to a hearing and (2) his seventh amendment right to a jury trial. The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1346(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291. We affirm.

In 1982, Boaz filed a W-4 form claiming he was exempt from federal income taxes. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) subsequently assessed Boaz a $500 penalty under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 6682 for filing a false W-4 form. Boaz failed to pay the penalty. The IRS issued Boaz a notice of levy on his wages pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Sec. 6331. The IRS then collected the penalty from Boaz's wages.

Boaz filed a claim with the IRS for refund of the penalty, which it denied. Boaz then filed this action in federal district court.

We review independently the district court's dismissal of Boaz's action for failure to state a claim. Fort Vancouver Plywood Co. v. United States, 747 F.2d 547, 552 (9th Cir.1984). We limit our review to the contents of his complaint. Id. All allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to Boaz. Western Reserve Oil & Gas Co. v. New, 765 F.2d 1428, 1430 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1065 (1986).

Boaz argues that the IRS's assessment and levy of a penalty under section 6682 for filing a false W-4 form violated his fifth amendment due process rights to a hearing prior to the deprivation of property. It has long been established that the IRS's summary collection procedures are constitutional. Phillips v. Commissioner, 283 U.S. 589, 597 (1931). Boaz's due process rights are adequately protected by the statutory scheme allowing him to sue for a refund in federal court. Stonecipher v. Bray, 653 F.2d 398, 403 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1154 (1982). Boaz does not have a constitutional right to a pre-levy hearing. Bothke v. Fluor Engineers & Construction, Inc., 834 F.2d 804, 811 (9th Cir.1987). Nor does he have a right to a hearing before the IRS assesses a penalty. See Boynton v. United States, 566 F.2d 50, 53 (9th Cir.1977). Furthermore, the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim does not violate due process. Stonecipher, 635 F.2d at 400. The district court, therefore, properly dismissed Boaz's due process claims.

Boaz also argues that the IRS's collection procedures and the district court's dismissal violated his seventh amendment right to a jury trial. The seventh amendment right to a jury trial, however, does not apply to action against the United States. Hudson v. United States, 766 F.2d 1288, 1292 (9th Cir.1985). Because Boaz's action is against the United States, Boaz has failed to state a claim. The district court's dismissal was proper.

AFFIRMED.

Note: This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the Courts of this Circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.