NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 29 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 21-50052 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00783-TJH-2 v. MEMORANDUM* SUREN GARIBYAN, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Terry J. Hatter, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 15, 2022** Before: SILVERMAN, WATFORD, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

Suren Garibyan appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, see United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021), we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Garibyan contends that, because the district court erroneously believed it was constrained by U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13, it did not consider all of his arguments in support of his assertion that he had extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release. We do not address this claim because the court concluded that, even if Garibyan had shown extraordinary and compelling reasons, it would deny his motion under the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Contrary to Garibyan’s contention, the court considered his § 3553(a) arguments, adequately explained its decision, and did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the § 3553(a) factors did not support relief. See Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965 (2018); Keller, 2 F.4th at 1284.

AFFIRMED.

2 21-50052