*1 Before: SILVERMAN, WATFORD, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Gary James Roller appeals from the district court’s order finding that Roller violated the terms of his supervised release and reinstating his supervised release term. We dismiss the appeal as moot.

During the pendency of this appeal, Roller completed his supervised release *2 term, thus rendering his appeal moot. See Spencer v. Kemna , 523 U.S. 1, 14 (1998); United States v. King , 891 F.3d 868, 869-70, 872 (9th Cir. 2018) (applying Spencer to a supervised release revocation and concluding that appeal from revocation judgment was moot upon appellant’s completion of his sentence). Roller’s summary assertion, without any supporting argument, that the “ capable of repetition, yet evading review ” exception to mootness applies here is unavailing. See Spencer , 523 U.S. at 17-18.

DISMISSED.

2 19-10205

[*] 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).