MEMORANDUM **

Juan Zamora-Meraz appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Zamora-Meraz contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing *511to adequately discuss or analyze factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553, by placing excessive weight on the Sentencing Guidelines, and by failing to discuss mitigating circumstances. Because Zamora-Meraz did not object on these grounds in district court, plain error review applies. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761-62 (9th Cir. 2008). We conclude that Zamora-Meraz cannot show “a reasonable probability that he would have received a different sentence” absent any procedural error. See id. at 762.

Zamora-Meraz further contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances, including Zamora-Meraz’s criminal history, the sentence, at the low-end of the applicable Guidelines range, is reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.