MEMORANDUM **
Kyle Cross appeals from the district courts 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, and we vacate and remand.
Cross primarily contends that the district court applied the wrong legal standard by deferring to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 as an applicable policy statement. After the district courts decision denying relief and the parties’ briefing on appeal, this court held that the current version of U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 is not binding as applied to § 3582(c)(1)(A) motions brought by prisoners. See United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2021) (“The Sentencing Commissions statements in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 may inform a district courts discretion for § 3582(c)(1)(A) motions filed by a defendant, but they are not binding.”). Because it is unclear whether the district court treated U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 as binding in this case, we vacate and remand so that the district court can reassess Crosss motion for compassionate release under the standard set forth in Aruda. See id.
We offer no views as to the merits of Crosss § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion, and we need not reach his remaining arguments on appeal.
VACATED and REMANDED.