
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hernan GOMEZ-GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-30150.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 14, 2015.
    
    Filed Oct. 21, 2015.
    Christopher S. Atwood, Special Assistant U.S., Anthony G. Hall, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Boise, ID, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jeffrey Heineman, Heineman Law Office, Boise, ID, for Defendant-Appellant:
    Before: SILVERMAN, BERZON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Hernán Gomez-Gutierrez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 180-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§' 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gomez-Gutierrez argues for the first time on appeal that the government breached the plea agreement by implicitly arguing for" a sentence greater than the one it had agreed to recommend. We review for plain error, United States v. Gonzalez-Aguilar, 718 F.3d 1185, 1187 (9th Cir.2013), and find none. Even assuming that the government’s isolated and brief comments breached the plea agreement, Gomez-Gutierrez has not shown that there is a reasonable probability that he would have received a shorter sentence absent the government’s alleged breach. See id. at 1187-90.

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