Opinion
No. 06-71531.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed April 9, 2007.
Alejandro Garcia, Esq., City of Commerce, CA, for Petitioner.
CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office Of The District Counsel, Department Of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A91-666-975.
Before: O'SCANNLAIN, GRABER and BEA, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Respondent's opposed motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The Board of Immigration Appeals correctly determined petitioner's removability. See 8 U.S.C. § 1256(a); Biggs v. INS, 55 F.3d 1398, 1401 (9th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied.