
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Isaih VEYTIA, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 10-50027.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.
    
    Filed Jan. 5, 2011.
    Timothy C. Perry, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Mark F. Adams, Mark F. Adams, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Isaih Veytia appeals from the 96-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Veytia contends that, when imposing a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum, the district court erred by determining that the government’s substantial assistance motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) permitted it to consider only the factors set forth in section 3553(e) and not the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Veytia contends that this determination conflicts with Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 128 S.Ct. 558, 169 L.Ed.2d 481 (2007), and leads to a sentence that violates the parsimony principle. These contentions are foreclosed. See United States v. Jackson, 577 F.3d 1032, 1035-36 (9th Cir.2009).

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