
    Uriel Valdovinos TORRES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 11-35950.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 10, 2014.
    
    Filed March 14, 2014.
    Nicholas W. Marchi, Carney & Marchi, PS, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Patricia C. Lally, Assistant U.S., Roger Scott Rogoff, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Federal prisoner Uriel Valdovinos Torres appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo a district court’s denial of a section 2255 motion, see United States v. Aguirre-Ganceda, 592 F.3d 1043, 1045 (9th Cir.2010), and we affirm.

Valdovinos Torres contends that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance under Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), when she failed to inform him of the immigration consequences of his guilty plea. Because Valdovinos Torres’s conviction became final before Padilla was decided, his contention is foreclosed by Chaidez v. United States, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1103, 1113, 185 L.Ed.2d 149 (2013), in which the Supreme Court held that Padilla does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review.

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