
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fidel ANGEL-RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-50529
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted February 14, 2017 
    
    Filed February 27, 2017
    Daniel Earl Zipp, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Joseph M. McMullen, Esquire, Law Offices of Joseph M, McMullen, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Fidel Angel-Ruiz appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 78-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Angel-Ruiz contends that the district court clearly erred when it denied his request for a minor role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. The record reflects that the court properly compared Angel-Ruiz to his co-participants in the offense, and considered all of the factors enumerated in the commentary to the minor role Guideline. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C) (2015); United States v. Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th Cir. 2016). In light of the totality of the circumstances, including Angel-Ruiz’s repeated involvement in transporting drugs into the United States and money back to Mexico, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Angel-Ruiz was not a minor participant. See Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d at 522-23.

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