Koyomejian

MEMORANDUM **

Wanis Koyomejian appeals from the district court’s denial of his request for a further reduction of his sentence pursuant to Rule 35(b). of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. We have jurisdiction *24 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Koyomejian argues that his plea agreement required the government to file a Rule 35(b) motion if he cooperated, and that the government breached the agreement by failing to do so. The district court’s denial of a motion to compel specific performance of a plea agreement is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Anthony, 93 F.3d 614, 616 (9th Cir.1996). There is a conflict “about the standard of review — clear error or de novo — for determining whether the government has breached a plea agreement.” United States v. Quach, 302 F.3d 1096, 1100 (9th Cir.2002) (collecting cases and recognizing conflict).

Under either a de novo or clear error standard of review, the district court did not err in finding that the government did not breach the plea agreement. The plea agreement stated that “[njothing in this agreement requires the government to accept any cooperation or assistance that…