Case Name: Oswaldo Jacobo PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-01
Citations: 209 F. App'x 664
Docket Number: No. 05-75002
Parties: Oswaldo Jacobo PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, GOULD and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 209
Pages: 664–664

Head Matter:
Oswaldo Jacobo PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-75002.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 27, 2006.
Filed Dec. 1, 2006.
Oswaldo Jacobo Perez, Santa Ana, CA, pro se.
District Director, 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, Mark C. Walters, Esq., Jennifer L. Lightbody, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: LEAVY, GOULD and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
This is a petition for review from the denial of petitioner's seventh motion to reopen or reconsider.
The Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner's seventh motion to reopen or reconsider, because the motion was numerically barred. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b); Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960 (9th Cir.2002) (BIA's denial of a motion to reconsider is reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, respondent's 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).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.