MEMORANDUM **
Joseph Vasquez, Jr., appeals from the district courts judgment and challenges the 320-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Vasquez contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because it does not adequately account for his rehabilitative efforts and because it creates an unwarranted disparity with a co-defendant. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The record makes clear that the court accounted for Vasquezs rehabilitation efforts by granting a downward variance, but concluded that a further variance was not warranted because of the role Vasquez played in the drug conspiracy and his previous convictions for drug trafficking. Contrary to Vasquezs argument, the court conducted an individualized assessment of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and the below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of those factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586. Moreover, the alleged sentencing disparity is not unwarranted because Vasquez is not similarly situated to his co-defendant. See United States v. Osinger, 753 F.3d 939, 949 (9th Cir. 2014).
AFFIRMED.