Bernie Christopher Ramirez appeals his 100-month sentence following a guilty plea to distribution of cocaine base. Ramirez argues that his sentence, which is within the applicable sentencing guideline range, is inherently unreasonable under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), due to the disparate sentences imposed under the United States Sentencing Guidelines for offenses involving cocaine base and powder *956 cocaine. Ramirez concedes that his argument is foreclosed by this court’s precedent. See United States v. Leatch, 482 F.3d 790, 791-92 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (June 21, 2007) (No. 06-12046); United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554-55 (5th Cir. 2006). Although Ramirez does not otherwise challenge the advisory Guidelines applicable to his sentence, he argues that his sentence is not entitled to a presumption of reasonableness. This issue is also foreclosed as the Supreme Court has affirmed that a sentence within a properly calculated Guideline range is presumptively reasonable. Rita v. United States, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462-68, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).

AFFIRMED.