Case Name: Odilon WENCES-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-08-18
Citations: 289 F. App'x 251
Docket Number: No. 08-71462
Parties: Odilon WENCES-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 289
Pages: 251–252

Head Matter:
Odilon WENCES-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 08-71462.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 11, 2008.
Filed Aug. 18, 2008.
Marc A. Karlin, Esquire, Karlin & Karlin, APC, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Greg D. Mack, Esquire, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: CANBY, LEAVY, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner's motion to extend the deadline to file a response to this court's April 15, 2008 order to show cause is granted. The Clerk shall file the response received May 14, 2008.
The Board of Immigration Appeals properly found petitioner ineligible for cancellation of removal due to his 1999 conviction for domestic violence under California Penal Code § 273.5(a). See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(C), incorporating 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E). Petitioner's contention that he was eligible for cancellation because his conviction is not a crime involving moral turpitude is inapposite.
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). Respondent's motion for summary disposition is therefore granted.
Ml other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.