
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert James SCHEAFFER, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-30004
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 14, 2016 
    
    FILED June 20, 2016
    Jessica Anne Betley, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USGF—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
    Lindsay Lorang, Lorang Law, PC, Havre, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Scheaffer's request for oral argument is denied.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Robert James Scheaffer, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges a special condition of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for sexual abuse of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153(a) and 2243(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand.

Scheaffer challenges the district court’s imposition of Special Condition 10, which prohibits him from associating with minors in several ways. As the government concedes, the portion of the condition prohibiting Scheaffer from dating or socializing with any person he knows to have minor children is overbroad. See United States v. Wolf Child, 699 F.3d 1082, 1100-02 (9th Cir. 2012). We, therefore, vacate the condition and remand for the district court to consider whether to impose a similar but more narrowly drawn condition. See id. at 1103. In light of this disposition, we do not reach Seheaffer’s challenge to the other portions of the special condition. Schaeffer may raise those arguments on remand if the district court elects to impose a similar condition.

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