Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Manuel ARCINIEGA, aka Jessie Gonzalez-Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-17
Citations: 358 F. App'x 991
Docket Number: No. 08-10427
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Manuel ARCINIEGA, aka Jessie Gonzalez-Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 358
Pages: 991–992

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Manuel ARCINIEGA, aka Jessie Gonzalez-Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10427.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
Filed Dec. 17, 2009.
Michael M. Beckwith, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jose Manuel Arciniega, Taft, CA, pro se.
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jose Manuel Arciniega appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Arciniega contends that the district court erred when it denied his 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 709 to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(c)(l)(A). Because that Amendment is not referenced by U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(e), Arciniega is not eligible for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2). See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(a) (2008); United States v. Cueto, 9 F.3d 1438, 1440-41 (9th Cir.1993).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.