Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8625038
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Guardado-Ortega v. Gonzales
No. 8625038 · Decided September 25, 2006
No. 8625038·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
September 25, 2006
Citation
No. 8625038
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** 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 because petitioner did not prove she had been in the United States continuously for 10 years as required under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b) for cancellation of removal. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard); see also Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594, 599 (9th Cir.2002). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied. All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), 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.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** 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 because petitioner did not prove she had been in the Unite
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** 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 because petitioner did not prove she had been in the Unite
02Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard); see also Jimenez-Angeles v.
03The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v.
04Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** 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 because petitioner did not prove she had been in the Unite
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Guardado-Ortega v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on September 25, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8625038 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.