Marquez

MEMORANDUM **

Danny P. Marquez appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the Government to bring a Fed. R.Crim.P. 35(b) motion for reduction of his sentence based on Marquez’s substantial assistance to the government.

The Government contends, as an initial matter, that we lack jurisdiction to review this appeal. However, we reject this contention. See 18 U.S.C. § 3742 ; see also United States v. Treleaven, 35 F.3d 458, 461 (9th Cir.1994) (holding that the government’s refusal to move for a substantial-assistance departure is reviewable if it “was based on ... a breach of a plea agreement”).

Turning to the merits of this appeal, we review for abuse of discretion a denial of a *679 motion to compel specific performance of a plea agreement, and the denial of a Rule 85(b) motion. See United States v. Anthony, 93 F.3d 614, 616 (9th Cir.1996); see also United States v. Thayer, 857 F.2d 1358, 1359 (9th Cir.1988). Marquez contends that the Government was obligated under the terms of his plea agreement to move for a substantial assistance departure. He notes that the Government promised, in his plea agreement, to file a downward-departure motion, as provided…