
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor IGBINEWEKA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-50008.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 30, 2010.
    
    Filed Sept. 1, 2010.
    Michael J. Raphael, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Humberto Diaz, AFPD, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, O’SCANNLAIN and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Under the terms of his plea agreement, Igbineweka waived the right to appeal his custodial sentence. See United States v. Martinez, 143 F.3d 1266, 1271 (9th Cir.1998). The government didn’t breach the agreement or waive his waiver, nor did the district court advise Igbineweka that he could appeal that part of his sentence. The agreement permitted him to appeal the amount of restitution, but he didn’t object to the “actual loss” calculation in the presentence report. The district court was therefore entitled to treat it as a finding of fact. Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(i)(3)(A). We do not review the ineffective assistance claim on this direct appeal because the record is insufficient to evaluate it. See United States v. Jeronimo, 398 F.3d 1149, 1155-56 (9th Cir.2005).

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