Meng Tuan Wang appeals from the sentence imposed at resentencing pursuant to his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute approximately 1,000 doses of MDMA. Wang was sentenced to 100 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Wang argues that the imposed sentence was unreasonable because (1) there was an unwarranted disparity between his sentence and his codefendant’s sentence, (2) his sentence failed to reflect his rehabilitative progress following his original sentencing, and (3) his sentence should have been lower in light of the weak evidence against him.

Wang correctly concedes that his first argument is foreclosed by this court’s holding in United States v. Duhon, 440 F.3d 711, 720 (5th Cir. 2006). His remaining arguments fail to show that his sentence was unreasonable, especially in light of the great deference accorded under United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 518-20 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 828, 126 S.Ct. 43,163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005).

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.