
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antoinne Lee FEATHERSTONE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10465.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Sept. 24, 2013.
    
    Filed Oct. 3, 2013.
    Mark S. Kokanovich, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Antoinne Lee Featherstone, Adelanto, CA, pro se.
    David Eisenberg, I, Esquire, David Ei-senberg, PLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Antoinne Lee Featherstone appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 141-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for two counts of armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d); and using a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(l)(A)(ii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Featherstone’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Featherstone the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Featherstone has waived his right to appeal his sentence. 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 issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

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