MEMORANDUM **
Coraleen Tuisaloo appeals from the district courts order denying her 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.
Tuisaloo contends that the district court erred by treating U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 as a binding policy statement. The government concedes, and we agree, that remand is warranted for the district court to reassess Tuisaloos motion for compassionate release under the standard set forth in United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2021) (“[T]he current version of U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 is not an applicable policy statement for 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motions filed by a defendant.” (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted)). Accordingly, we vacate the district courts order denying Tuisaloos motion and remand for further proceedings. See id.
We offer no views as to the merits of Tuisaloos § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion, and we need not reach her remaining arguments on appeal.
VACATED and REMANDED.