
    Robert C. JACOBSEN; Carol S. Jacobsen, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 15-71608
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 11, 2017 
    
    Filed April 25, 2017
    Robert C. Jacobsen, Pro Se
    Carol S. Jacobsen, Pro Se
    Curtis Clarence Pett, Esquire, Richard Farber, Esquire, Supervisory Attorney, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, William J. Wilkins, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee
    Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Robert C. and Carol S. Jacobsen appeal pro se from the Tax Court’s determination following a trial concerning an income tax deficiency and penalty under 26 U.S.C. § 6662(a) for tax year 2010. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We affirm.

The Jacobsens have waived their appeal of the Tax Court’s determination of the tax deficiency by failing to address in their opening brief how the Tax Court erred in reaching its conclusions. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim[.]”).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     