UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oscar JIMENEZ-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant, 471 F. App'x 685

MEMORANDUM Oscar Jimenez-Lopez appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Jimenez-Lopez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to explain adequately the reasons for the sentence. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and we find none. See United States v.

Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc) (“[Ajdequate explanation in some cases may ... be inferred from the PSR or the record as a whole.”). Jimenez-Lopez also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that, under the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(

a) sentencing factors, the sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.