MEMORANDUM *
Edward Fuentes appeals the district courts denial of his motions for sentence reduction and for compassionate release. Fuentes was sentenced in 2012 to 240 months in prison on drug trafficking convictions after a guilty plea. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review discretionary sentence-reduction decisions for abuse of discretion and questions of statutory interpretation de novo. See United States v. Chaney, 581 F.3d 1123, 1125 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Carey, 929 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir. 2019).
This court has already affirmed the district courts discretionary denial of Fuentess 2017 motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and the U.S. Sentencing Commissions reduction of the base offense levels of certain drug-related crimes. United States v. Fuentes, 735 F. Appx 356 (9th Cir. 2018). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Fuentess renewed § 3582(c)(2) motion, which was based on asserted exigencies caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this appeal, he essentially asks this court to reweigh the factors he argued to the district court, and he does not establish any abuse of the district courts discretion.
The district court also appropriately denied relief under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. A court may not excuse a defendants failure to comply with a statutory exhaustion requirement. See Ross v. Blake, ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1856–57, 195 L.Ed.2d 117 (2016). Fuentes may file a new motion in the district court below after he has exhausted his remedies.
The district courts order is AFFIRMED. The governments motion to supplement the record on appeal is DENIED as moot.