Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor VALLADARES-REAL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-12-05
Citations: 548 F. App'x 392
Docket Number: No. 12-50000
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor VALLADARES-REAL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 548
Pages: 392–392

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor VALLADARES-REAL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-50000.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 19, 2013.
Filed Dec. 5, 2013.
Sherri Walker Hobson, Assistant U.S., Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Fay Arfa, Esquire, Fay Arfa, A Law Corporation, Los Angeles, CA, for Defen-danh-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Victor Valladares-Real appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 168-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Valladares-Real contends that the district court erred by denying him a two-level minor-role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We review for clear error, see United States v. Rosas, 615 F.3d 1058, 1066 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. Because Valladares-Real failed to demonstrate that he was "substantially less culpable than the average participant," the district court correctly denied the adjustment. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n. 3(A); Rosas, 615 F.3d at 1067. Valladares-Real's argument that our decision in United States v. Rojas-Millan, 234 F.3d 464 (9th Cir.2000), compels a different result is unavailing.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.