Danny Ray Lynch, federal prisoner # 13758-035, appeals the district court’s grant of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence based on the amendments to the crack cocaine Guideline. 1 Lynch argues that the district court failed to state that it had considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and to state the reasons for the sentence. He further contends that he was entitled to a greater reduction in his sentence of imprisonment.

We review a district court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) for an abuse of discretion, and its interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines is reviewed de novo. United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 517, 175 L.Ed.2d 366 (2009). “[TJhere are clear and significant differences between original sentencing proceedings and sentence modification proceedings.” United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 672 (5th Cir. 2009) (quoting *503 Doublin, 572 F.3d at 238), petition for• cert filed (Jan. 28, 2010) (No. 09-8939). Whereas original sentencing proceedings are governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3553, sentencing modification proceedings are governed by § 3582(c)(2), which requires only that the district court consider the § 3553(a) factors. Id. at 673. Lynch submitted a sentencing brief in which he “described in detail why the § 3553(a) factors weighed in favor of a sentence at the bottom of, or below, the sentencing range.” See id. at 673. This court “can assume that [the district court] considered” Lynch’s arguments regarding the § 3553(a) factors and “that it concluded that the § 3553(a) factors weigh in [the defendant’s] favor.” Evan.s, 587 F.3d at 673 (internal quotations and citations omitted). The district court is “not required to state findings of facts and conclusions of law” when granting or denying a motion under § 3582(c)(2). Id. at 674 (internal quotations and citation omitted). Moreover, a defendant cannot successfully challenge a district court’s failure to provide reasons “for granting his [§ 3582(c)(2) ] motion but not providing a satisfactorily low enough sentence within the recalculated range.” Id.

AFFIRMED.