NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 24 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-5588 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 3:12-cr-00004-MMD-CSD-1 v. MEMORANDUM* DANIEL JAMES DRAPER, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Miranda M. Du, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 17, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, OWENS, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Daniel James Draper appeals pro se 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).

Draper contends that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion because a change in law under Lora v. United States, 599 U.S. 453 (2023), his rehabilitative efforts in prison, and his mother’s illness support compassionate release. The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that none of these circumstances is extraordinary and compelling. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). As the district court explained, Lora does not show that the sentencing court would have imposed a lower sentence. As to Draper’s remaining arguments, the district court considered them and reasonably concluded they were insufficient to warrant compassionate release “given the reasons for the imposition of the sentence in the first place.” On this record, we affirm.

Any pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 24-5588