
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan CAMACHO-AMADOR, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-50030.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 9, 2014.
    
    Filed Dec. 16, 2014.
    Joseph Orabona, Assistant U.S., Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    David Lawerence Baker, Law Offices of David L. Baker, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Juan Camacho-Amador appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 68-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Camacho-Amador contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because he is a young, first-time offender who committed the offense to support his family. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Camacho-Ama-dor’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence 120 months below the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See id.

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