Bernardo Granado-Velasquez (Granado) appeals his sentence following his guilty-plea conviction of illegally reentering the United States after having been removed, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). The district court sentenced Gra-nado to 120 months in prison, which was well above the 46-to-57-month advisory guidelines imprisonment range calculated by the Probation Office in Granado’s Pre-sentence Report.

Granado contends that the district court (1) violated Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(h) and Burns v. United States, 501 U.S. 129, 111 S.Ct. 2182, 115 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991), by failing to notify the parties that it was considering a sua sponte upward “departure” from the guidelines range and (2) failed to adhere to the methodology prescribed in U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3 for calculating the extent of such a “departure.” Granado’s sentence was imposed after the issuance of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and the district court deemed the above-the-guidelines-range sentence a “variance” rather than a “departure.” Granado’s arguments are foreclosed by United States v. Mejia-Huerta, 480 F.3d 713, 721-24 (5th Cir. 2007).

The sentence is AFFIRMED.