
    Enriqueta Gomez CASTRO; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-74274.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Feb. 20, 2007.
    
    Filed Feb. 26, 2007.
    Adrian H. Triminio, Esq., Fountain Valley, CA, for Petitioners.
    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, Daniel E. Goldman, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of linmigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, TASHIMA and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioners’ motion to reconsider.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reconsider as untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(2) (stating time limits for filing motions to reconsider); Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 895-96 (9th Cir.2003).

Accordingly, 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).

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 is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     