MEMORANDUM **

Ruby Jane Gaylor appeals pro se from the district court’s order permanently enjoining her from filing false tax documents or providing false tax documents to any persons or entities. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the issuance of a permanent injunction. United States v. Kapp, 564 F.3d 1103, 1109 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by entering a permanent injunction preventing Gaylor from filing false tax documents or providing false tax documents to other persons or entities. See 26 U.S.C. § 7402(a) (“The district courts of the United States at the instance of the United States shall have such jurisdiction to make and issue ... orders of injunction ... as may be necessary or appropriate for the enforcement of the internal revenue laws.”); California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep’t of Agrie., 575 F.3d 999, 1019 (9th Cir. 2009) (listing traditional permanent injunction factors).

Contrary to Gaylor’s contentions, the government’s service of process was not *479 defective under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(2), nor was the government required to enter into a settlement agreement with her.

Gaylor’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.