Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford G. BIRDINGROUND, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-09-29
Citations: 185 F. App'x 713
Docket Number: No. 05-30430
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford G. BIRDINGROUND, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, NOONAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 185
Pages: 713–714

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford G. BIRDINGROUND, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-30430.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Aug. 16, 2006.
Filed Sept. 29, 2006.
Carl E. Rostad, Esq., USGF-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Paul G. Matt, Esq., Matt Law Office, Penelope S. Strong, Esq., Strong Law Of fice, Billings, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PREGERSON, NOONAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The district court did not solicit the views of counsel before deciding whether to re-sentence Appellant Clifford G. BirdinGround under United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.2005). This mistake requires us to re-remand the case for compliance with Ameline. See United States v. Montgomery, — F.3d -, 2006 WL 2473448, at *5 (9th Cir. Aug. 29, 2006).
REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.