Reshard

MEMORANDUM **

John Wesley Reshard appeals from the sentence imposed following his guilty plea *629 conviction for conspiracy, possession of fifteen or more unauthorized access devices, and possession of device-making equipment, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029 (a)(3), (a)(4), and (b)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Reshard contests the district court’s entry of an amended judgment requiring him to pay $141,276.60 in restitution. Reshard asserts that, at sentencing and in the original judgment, the district court imposed a requirement that he pay $140,276.60, an amount different than the sum required by the amended judgment.

He notes that in United States v. Allen, 157 F.3d 661, 668 (9th Cir.1998), this court held that “where there is a direct conflict between an unambiguous oral pronouncement of sentence and the written judgment and commitment, this Court has uniformly held that the oral pronouncement, as correctly reported, must control.” He asserts that the district court’s oral pronouncement at sentencing was controlling over the district court’s subsequent amendment to the written judgment. We disagree.

Allen only applies in situations…