
    David GILLEN-CEJA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-73883.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 18, 2006.
    
    Filed Dec. 21, 2006.
    David Gillen-Ceja, Bakersfield, 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, Thomas Fatouros, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, McKEOWN and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   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). Motions to reopen must be filed no later than 90 days after the date of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ final decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). 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 courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     