
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Levi Samuel LABUFF, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 03-30143.
    D.C. No. CR-02-00102-SEH.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 4, 2004.
    
    Decided Aug. 9, 2004.
    Joe Thaggard, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Lisa Amille Swanson, Attorney at Law, Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before HALL, KLEINFELD, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Labuff s request for consolidation of this case with his other appeal is now moot because his other appeal has been decided. His ineffective-assistance argument fails because the decision in his appeal of the companion case establishes that the motion to suppress that his attorney in this case failed to make would not have succeeded.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     
      
      . United States v. LaBuff, 101 Fed.Appx. 678 (9th Cir.2004) (unpublished).
     
      
      . See id. at 680-81. Rule 36-3(b) allows citation of unpublished decisions for such purposes as "law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel,” and "for factual purposes, such as to show double jeopardy, sanc-tionable conduct, notice, entitlement to attorneys' fees, or the existence of a related case.”
     