MEMORANDUM **

Felix Santiago Lemus-Rodriguez appeals from the 41-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Lemus-Rodriguez contends that the district court committed procedural error by: (1) relying on a clearly erroneous fact; (2) *679failing to explain adequately its reasons for rejecting his arguments; and (3) failing to explain adequately the reasons for and the extent of variance from the guidelines range.

Lemus-Rodriguez has not demonstrated that the alleged factual error by the district court affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761-62 (9th Cir. 2008). LemusRodriguez’s other contentions of procedural error are belied by the record. It is clear the district court considered LemusRodriguez’s sentencing arguments. See United States v. Perez-Perez, 512 F.3d 514, 516 (9th Cir. 2008).

Finally, in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

AFFIRMED.