
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector GONZALEZ-CORELLA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-50158.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 24, 2013.
    
    Filed Aug. 1, 2013.
    Emily Keifer, Assistant U.S., Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    James Fife, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Hector Gonzalez-Corella appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 63-month sentence and 3-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gonzalez-Corella contends that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level increase pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) for his prior robbery conviction under section 211 of the California Penal Code. As Gonzalez-Corella concedes, this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Flores-Mejia, 687 F.3d 1213, 1214-16 (9th Cir.2012). We decline Gonzalez-Corella’s request that we seek en banc review of this issue.

Gonzalez-Corella also contends that the three-year term of supervised release is substantively unreasonable in light of U.S.S.G. § 5Dl.l(c). The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Gonzalez-Corella’s term of supervised release. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances, including Gonzalez-Corella’s extensive criminal history and the need for additional deterrence. See id.; U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 cmt. n. 5 (the district court should consider imposing supervised release on a deportable alien “if the court determines it would provide an added measure of deterrence and protection”).

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