
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Guillermo ATONDO-CASTANEDA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-10151.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 18, 2014.
    
    Filed Oct. 27, 2014.
    Mark S. Kokanovich, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    David Eisenberg, I, Esquire, David Ei-senberg, PLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Guillermo Atondo-Castaneda, Big Spring, TX, pro se.
    
      Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Guillermo Atondo-Castaneda appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 87-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of actual methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(viii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 886 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Atondo-Castaneda’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 Atondo-Cas-taneda the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Atondo-Castaneda has waived his right to appeal his conviction and 87-month sentence. Because thé record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009).

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.
     