Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert J. ROWEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-01-27
Citations: 164 F. App'x 642
Docket Number: No. 05-16532
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Robert J. ROWEN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: T.G. NELSON, SILVERMAN and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 164
Pages: 642–643

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Robert J. ROWEN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-16532.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 23, 2006.
Decided Jan. 27, 2006.
USAK — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, Kenneth W. Rosenberg, Esq., Keith S. Blair, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Tax Division, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Robert J. Rowen, Sebastopol, CA, pro se.
Before: T.G. NELSON, SILVERMAN and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
We have reviewed appellant's opposition to the motion for summary affirmance and appellant's opening brief. The motion for summary affirmance is granted because the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further ar gument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).
Appellant's alternative "motion for more definite statement and/or motion to strike" is denied.
The district court's judgment is
AFFIRMED.
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.