22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T4f3,MEMORANDUM ** In these consolidated appeals, Joel Nater appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 72-month sentence for one count of false representation of a social security number, two counts of bankruptcy fraud, and one count of failure to appear, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408 (a)(7)(B), 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 (3), and 3146(a)(1), respectively. Nater’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Nater has not filed a pro se supplemental brief, and appellee did not file an answering brief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm. Our review of the Anders brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), does not reveal any arguable issues for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record is GRANTED, and the district court’s decision is AFFIRMED. 1 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. . The Clerk is directed to conform the docket to the caption as set forth above.24:T50e,

MEMORANDUM **

In these consolidated appeals, Joel Nater appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 72-month sentence for one count of false representation of a social security number, two counts of bankruptcy fraud, and one count of failure to appear, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408 (a)(7)(B), 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 (3), and 3146(a)(1), respectively. Nater’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Nater has not filed a pro se supplemental brief, and appellee did not file an answering brief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.

Our review of the Anders brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), does not reveal any arguable issues for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record is GRANTED, and the district court’s decision is AFFIRMED. 1

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

. The Clerk is directed to conform the docket to the caption as set forth above.