*1 Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Omar Dominguez-Valencia appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
*2 Dominguez-Valencia contends that his underlying removal order, which was based on his conviction for burglary in violation of California Penal Code § 459, is invalid in light of this court’s decision in Dimaya v. Lynch , 803 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2015), cert. granted , 137 S. Ct. 31 (2016). Regardless of the merits of this contention, by entering an unconditional guilty plea, Dominguez-Valencia waived his right to challenge the validity of the underlying removal order. See Tollett v. Henderson , 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973).
Dominguez-Valencia’s unopposed motion to take judicial notice is granted. AFFIRMED.
2 15-50531
[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).