Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert J. HUNT, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-17
Citations: 270 F. App'x 556
Docket Number: Nos. 07-30326, 07-30343
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert J. HUNT, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 270
Pages: 556–557

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert J. HUNT, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 07-30326, 07-30343.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 10, 2008 .
Filed March 17, 2008.
Crandon Randell, USAK-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Kevin F. McCoy, FPDAK-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Anchorage, AK, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: T.G. NELSON, TASHIMA and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
A review of the unopposed motion to dismiss or for summary affirmance, the record and the opening brief 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). The district court is not required under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(3) to resolve disputed factual statements in presentence reports unrelated to the temporal length of a sentence. See United States v. Saeteurn, 504 F.3d 1175, 1178-81 (9th Cir.2007).
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court's judgment.
All other 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.