MEMORANDUM **
Carlos Manuel Olivera-Fernandez appeals from the district courts judgment and challenges the 18-month sentence imposed on his revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Olivera-Fernandez contends that the district court failed to make an individualized determination of the sentence when it rejected his pandemic-related mitigating argument. We need not resolve the parties’ dispute over the applicable standard of review because there was no error, plain or otherwise.
Although the district court noted that Olivera-Fernandezs pandemic-related mitigating argument would apply to other defendants, the court rejected the argument only after finding that Olivera-Fernandez did not have any health factors putting him at greater risk of illness from COVID-19. The district court considered Olivera-Fernandezs breach of the courts trust and the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, including the need for deterrence. On this record, the district court complied with its obligation to make an individualized determination of the proper sentence based on defendant-specific facts. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.