
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilsonis AYALA-VILLANUEVA, a.k.a. Juan Carlos Chavez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-10061.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 13, 2015.
    
    Filed May 18, 2015.
    Thomas C. Muehleck, Assistant U.S., Jonathan M.F. Loo, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USH-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Pamela O’Leary Tower, Attorney At Law,. Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Wilsonis Ayala-Villanueva, pro se.
    Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Wilsonis Ayala-Villanueva appeals from the district court’s amended judgment removing one of his supervised release conditions. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ayala-Villanueva’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Ayala-Villanueva has filed a pro se supplemental opening brief. No answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. Ayala-Villanueva’s pro se challenges to his conviction and sentence are waived. See United States v. Gianelli, 543 F.3d 1178, 1184 (9th Cir.2008). Any motion respecting the applicability of Amendment 782 to the Guidelines should be brought in the sentencing court in the first instance. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent excépt as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     