UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SUTANG WU, a.k.a. Suling Hong Wu, Defendant-Appellant, 466 F. App'x 636

MEMORANDUM Sutang Wu appeals pro se the denial of his motion under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 to correct a clerical error in his judgment and commitment order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Wu seeks to correct the judgment and commitment order to reflect that his participation in the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program is voluntary rather than mandatory. Because there is no error, clerical or otherwise, the district court properly declined to grant relief. See United States v.

Penna, 319 F.3d 509, 513 (9th Cir.2003) (“Rule 36 is a vehicle for correcting clerical errors in a judgment of conviction.”). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.