Asheim

MEMORANDUM **

Chadwick Edward Asheim appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a), and the 6-month consecutive sentence following revocation of supervised *523 release for committing a new law violation of attempted bank robbery. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Asheim contends that the district court erred by denying his request for an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(a). The district court did not err because Asheim waived his right to seek such an adjustment. See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993); of. United States v. De la Fuente, 8 F.3d 1333, 1337 (9th Cir.1993) (traditional contract law principles usually apply to plea agreements).

Asheim also contends that the district court failed to adequately explain the reasons for rejecting his attorney’s non-frivolous arguments relating to his mental health problems. There was no plain error affecting Asheim’s substantial rights. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 357-58 , 127 S.Ct. 2456 , 168 L.Ed.2d 203…