Fred

MEMORANDUM **

Dushane Fred appeals his sentence of 96 months imposed after a guilty plea to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113 (a)(6). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we will not recount it here.

I

Fred argues on appeal that the district court did not adequately explain the extent of its reasons for departing upward and that the extent of the departure was unreasonable. Because Fred did not challenge below the district court’s statement of its reasons for departing upward or the reasonableness of the departure, we review his challenge here for “plain error.” United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 413 (9th Cir.2000). “To obtain a reversal under this standard, [Fredjmust prove that there was ‘error’ that was ‘plain’ and that affected ‘substantial rights.’ ” Id. (quoting United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993)). If such conditions are satisfied, we may exercise our discretion to notice the forfeited error only if such error “seriously affect [s] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the…