MEMORANDUM **

Alvaro Zepeda-Toscano appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying his *589 motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Zepeda-Tóscano contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). Assuming without deciding that Zepeda-Toscano’s Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement does not preclude him from a sentence reduction under United States v. Davis, 825 F.3d 1014 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc), he is nonetheless ineligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 because his sentence is already below the minimum of the amended guideline range. See U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(b)(2)(A) (“[T]he court shall not reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and this policy statement to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range.”). Accordingly, the district court did not err by denying Zepeda-Toscano’s motion.

We reject Zepeda-Toscano’s claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because the Federal Public Defender did not represent him in these proceedings.

AFFIRMED.