Jesus Martinez-Alvarez appeals the 77-month sentence imposed in connection with his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. He makes no argument regarding his concurrent 36-month sentence for falsely claiming to be a United States citizen.

Arguing that his sentence is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), Martinez-Alvarez contends that the guidelines range did not adequately reflect his cultural assimilation; his familial reason for reentering the country; the poor quality of life he will live in Mexico; his ineligibility, as an alien, for certain prison programs; and his inability to participate in a fast track program.

Martinez-Alvarez’s sentence is within the properly calculated guidelines range and is presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 2009) (rejecting the notion that this court should examine the empirical basis behind each Guideline before applying the presumption of reasonableness). As Martinez-Alvarez concedes, his argument that the presumption should not apply is foreclosed. See Duarte, 569 F.3d at 529-31. Martinez-Alvarez has not rebutted the presumption that his within-guidelines sentence is reasonable. See United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). The district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Martinez-Alvarez.

AFFIRMED.