Case Name: Baldemar TINOCO-GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-04-09
Citations: 227 F. App'x 615
Docket Number: No. 06-71531
Parties: Baldemar TINOCO-GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GRABER and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 227
Pages: 615–616

Head Matter:
Baldemar TINOCO-GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-71531.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 4, 2007 .
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.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GRABER and BEA, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
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.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.