Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilbur MERIDA-SIMOTA, a.k.a. Wilber Merida-Simota, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-16
Citations: 224 F. App'x 715
Docket Number: No. 06-10561
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilbur MERIDA-SIMOTA, a.k.a. Wilber Merida-Simota, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, TROTT and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 224
Pages: 715–715

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilbur MERIDA-SIMOTA, a.k.a. Wilber Merida-Simota, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-10561.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 12, 2007.
Filed March 16, 2007.
Monte C. Clausen, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Randolfo V. Lopez, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Wilbur Merida-Simota, Florence, AZ, 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
Upon review of the record and appellant's opening brief, appellee's unopposed motion for summary disposition is granted because appellant raised no substantial issue as to the reasonableness of his sentence, or the denial of downward departure for cultural assimilation, that requires further argument. See United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1278-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (after Booker, the court reviews appellant's sentence for reasonableness and reviews the district court's application of the Sentencing Guidelines for abuse of discretion); United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam).
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court's judgment and sentence.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.