Case Name: Mark C. BERGERON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. King MOHAMMED VI; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-16
Citations: 224 F. App'x 717
Docket Number: No. 06-16117
Parties: Mark C. BERGERON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. King MOHAMMED VI; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: CANBY, TROTT and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 224
Pages: 717–718

Head Matter:
Mark C. BERGERON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. King MOHAMMED VI; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 06-16117.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 12, 2007.
Filed March 16, 2007.
Mark C. Bergeron, Roseville, CA, pro se.
Before: CANBY, TROTT and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The motion to reconsider is construed as a motion to reinstate the appeal. So con strued, the motion to reinstate is granted because the filing fees have been paid.
A review of the record and the response to the order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal 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). We agree that the district court lacked jurisdiction over this action under any of the exceptions listed in 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a).
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court's judgment.
All pending motions are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.