
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Natividad Aguilar CASARES, a.k.a. Natividad Caseres Aguilar, a.k.a. Natividad Ceseres Aguilar, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 11-50032.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 21, 2011.
    
    Filed Nov. 23, 2011.
    Hye Young Chon, Esquire, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los An-geles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michael Tanaka, Deputy Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Natividad Aguilar Casares appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 30-month sentence imposed for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Casares’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Casares the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Casares waived his right to appeal his sentence with the exception of the court’s calculation of his criminal history category. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Casares’s conviction and indicates that the appeal waiver is operative. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the sentence in part. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000). With regard to the court’s calculation of the criminal history category, our independent review of the record discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal, and we affirm.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

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