Case Name: Fortunato DIAZ; Jesus Fernando Diaz Alcantara, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-21
Citations: 189 F. App'x 681
Docket Number: No. 05-74577
Parties: Fortunato DIAZ; Jesus Fernando Diaz Alcantara, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 189
Pages: 681–682

Head Matter:
Fortunato DIAZ; Jesus Fernando Diaz Alcantara, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-74577.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 17, 2006.
Filed July 21, 2006.
Fortunato Diaz, Goleta, CA, pro se.
Jesus Fernando Diaz Alcantara, Goleta, CA, pro se.
CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Janice K. Redfern, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: B. FLETCHER, HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
This is a petition for review from the denial of petitioners' applications for cancellation of removal.
Respondent's 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 United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).
Petitioners do not challenge the finding that they lack a qualifying relative to establish eligibility for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D); Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir.2003). Further, petitioners' challenge to being placed in removal rather than deportation proceedings is foreclosed by Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594, 598-99 (9th Cir.2002).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
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.