
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maninder SINGH, a.k.a. Maninder Singh Reel, Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 11-30123, 11-30128.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 10, 2012.
    
    Filed Sept. 19, 2012.
    Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Richard Edward Cohen, Assistant U.S., Sarah Y. Vogel, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jason Brett Saunders, Law Offices of Gordon & Saunders, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, 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

In these consolidated appeals, Maninder Singh appeals from his guilty-plea convictions and concurrent 96-month sentences for conspiracy to bring in and transport aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(I) and (a)(1)(B)(I); and for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Singh’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Singh with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

In case number 11-30123, 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.

In case number 11-30128, our independent review of the record pursuant to Pen-son discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Singh’s conviction. We dismiss the appeal of the sentence in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

In case number 11-30123, the judgment is AFFIRMED. In case number 11-30128, the conviction is AFFIRMED, and the appeal of the sentence is DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     