
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles MOORE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-10197.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 13, 2012.
    
    Filed Nov. 19, 2012.
    Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Charles Moore appeals from the 21-month sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Moore contends that the district court erred by basing its sentencing decision on the seriousness of his underlying offense. The record shows that the district court took proper account of the seriousness of Moore’s conduct and did not impose sentence primarily on this basis. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir.2007). Moreover, in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

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