
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brianna Beth BORGA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-10470
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted September 26, 2017 
    
    Filed September 29, 2017
    Allison C. Jaros, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU-Office of the US Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Jill Elayne Thorpe, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. 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

Brianna Beth Borga appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for importation of a quantity of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a) and 960(a)(1) and (b)(3). We dismiss.

Borga argues that the district court procedurally erred by miscalculating the Guidelines range. The government contends that this appeal is barred by a valid appeal waiver. We review de novo whether a defendant has waived her right to appeal. See United States v. Harris, 628 F.3d 1203, 1205 (9th Cir. 2011). The terms of the appeal waiver in Borga’s plea agreement unambiguously encompass the claims raised in this appeal. See id. at 1205-06. Contrary to Borga’s contention, the record reflects that she. waived her appellate rights knowingly and voluntarily. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-87 (9th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, we dis- • miss pursuant to the valid waiver. See Harris, 628 F.3d at 1207.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     