Case Name: Alejandro Chavez DELGADO, 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 623
Docket Number: No. 06-74635
Parties: Alejandro Chavez DELGADO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAlN, GRABER and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 227
Pages: 623–624

Head Matter:
Alejandro Chavez DELGADO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-74635.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 4, 2007 .
Filed April 9, 2007.
Zaheer Zaidi, San Jose, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Colette J. Winston, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent:
Before: O’SCANNLAlN, 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
Petitioner's second motion for leave to file a late opposition is granted; Petitioner's opposition received January 30, 2007, has been filed.
Upon review of the record, 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 Urbina-Mauricio v. INS, 989 F.2d 1085, 1089 (9th Cir.1993) ("a conviction cannot be collaterally attacked in a deportation proceeding"); United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied. All other pending motions are denied as moot.
The temporary stay of removal confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) 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.