Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: As part of his omnibus motion, defendant moved to suppress the results of a breathalyzer test upon the ground that the ampoules used in the administration of the test were from a lot that was improperly mixed, and thus, that the test result was unreliable (see, People v. Uruburu, 169 A.D.2d 20). Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the suppression court erred in denying that motion without conducting a hearing. We conclude that a motion addressed to the integrity of the ampoules is not a motion to suppress authorized by CPL 710.20 (5) and that the suppression court did not err in summarily denying that application (see, People v Singh, 144 Misc.2d 402; People v. Amores, 143 Misc.2d 527, 531; but see, People v. Sherwood, 160 A.D.2d 1203, 1205, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 796; People v. Nieves, 143 Misc.2d 734; People v Pantaleo, 141 Misc.2d 251).