MEMORANDUM **

Anthony Macklin appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Macklin contends that the district court violated his Sixth Amendment right to due process and U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3, by considering prison disciplinary findings when denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion because the conduct was contested and not proven by a preponderance of the evidence. Assuming that the Government was required to meet this burden, the record reflects that the burden was met. See generally United States v. Dare, 425 F.3d 634, 642 (9th Cir. 2005) (recognizing that, “[a]s a general rule, the preponderance of the evidence standard is the appropriate standard for factual findings used for sentencing”).

AFFIRMED.