
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Efren OCHOA-GEMBE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-50407.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 10, 2012.
    
    Filed Sept. 14, 2012.
    Sherri Walker Hobson, Assistant U.S., Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Lynn Howard Ball, Law Office of Lynn H. Ball, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Efren Ochoa-Gembe, San Diego, CA, pro se.
    Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Efren Ochoa-Gembe appeals the 235-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to conspiracy to import methamphetamine and cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960, and 963. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we dismiss.

Ochoa-Gembe contends that the district court erred by not adequately addressing the disparity between his sentence and those of similarly-situated individuals, and by not sufficiently reducing his sentence for the cooperation he provided. In his written plea agreement, Ochoa-Gembe waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence unless the district court imposed a sentence higher than the high end of the resulting advisory Guidelines range. The district court sentenced Ochoa-Gembe to the low end of the advisory Guideline range, and as Ochoa-Gembe acknowledged in his opening brief, his “sentence was within the range requiring defendant to waive his appeal.” We conclude that Ochoa-Gembe knowingly and voluntarily agreed to the appellate waiver, and we enforce the appellate waiver. See United States v. Harris, 628 F.3d 1203, 1205 (9th Cir.2011).

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