The attorney appointed to represent Javier Antonie Gradandos has moved for *358 leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Gradandos has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and supplemental letter, along with the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

The record reflects a clerical error in the written judgment. Although the judgment refers to the offense of conviction as conspiracy to possess with intent to manufacture and distribute methamphetamine, the body of the indictment and signed factual basis reflect that Gradandos pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. Accordingly, we REMAND for the limited purpose of correction of the clerical error in the written judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. See United States v. Higgins, 739 F.3d 733, 739 n.16 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v. Rosales, 448 Fed.Appx. 466, 466-67 (5th Cir. 2011).