MEMORANDUM ***

Vinicio Antonio Jimenez-Diaz appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the six-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Jimenez-Diaz contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to give adequate consideration to his request that the sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release run concurrently to the sentence imposed for Jimenez-Diaz’s new criminal conviction. We review for plain error, see United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), and find none. The record reflects that the court considered Jimenez-Diaz’s argument and sufficiently explained the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.