Robert Lee Green appeals the 18-month prison sentence he received upon the revocation of his supervised release. He argues that the district court failed to provide sufficient reasons for the above-guidelines sentence. He did not object in the district court; thus, our review is for plain error only. See United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 259-60 (5th Cir. 2009).

Although the district court’s failure to provide specific reasons for the above-guidelines sentence is a clear, obvious error, see id. at 261-62, Green has not shown reversible plain error because he has not established that this error affects his substantial rights or the public reputation of the proceedings. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 129 S.Ct. 1428, 1429, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009). Green has not asserted, much less shown, how a more thorough explanation would have resulted in a shorter sentence, and there is no suggestion in the record that the district court considered any improper factor or would impose a different sentence on remand. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d at 261-62, 264. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.