U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2006

Munoz v. Gonzales

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 11, 2006 · Hawkins, Reinhardt, Schroeder

197 F. App'x 603

Counsel

Carlos Solano Munoz, Tucson, AZ, pro se., Carlos Zaid Solano Perez, Tucson, AZ, pro se., Karmina Solano Perez, Tucson, AZ, pro se., Zoila Romana Perez Castaneda, Tucson, AZ, 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, Anh-Thu P. Mai, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Karen Y. Stewart, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Respondent’s unopposed 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). 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 may not be cited to or by the *604courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.