Juan Javier Perez-Sanchez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 72-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

*2 Perez-Sanchez contends that the district court applied the wrong legal standard to his request for a minor role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, and erred in denying the reduction. We review the district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines de novo, and its factual finding that a defendant was not a minor participant for clear error. See United States v. Hurtado , 760 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir. 2014). Contrary to Perez-Sanchez’s claim, the district court properly compared Perez-Sanchez to his co-participants in the offense, and considered the factors enumerated in the Guideline and the totality of the circumstances, to determine whether Perez-Sanchez was “substantially less culpable than the average participant.” See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A), (C) (2015); United States v. Quintero-Leyva , 823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th Cir. 2016). Moreover, in light of the circumstances of the offense, the district court did not clearly err in concluding that Perez-Sanchez was not a minor participant. See Hurtado , 760 F.3d at 1069.

Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Perez-Sanchez to a below-Guidelines term. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the large amount of drugs that Perez-Sanchez imported. See Gall , 552 U.S. at 51.

AFFIRMED.

2 16-50091

[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. * * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).