Mezheritsky

MEMORANDUM ***

In United States v. Latysheva, 162 Fed. Appx. 720 (9th Cir.2006) (unpublished), we affirmed the convictions of Serge Mezheritsky (“Mezheritsky”), Tetyana Komisaruk (“T. Komisaruk”) and Valeriy Komisaruk (‘V. Komisaruk”) (collectively “Defendants” or “Appellants”) stemming from an alien-smuggling operation they ran from Mexico. We remanded for re-sentencing, however, pursuant to our decision in United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). On remand, the district court, after obtaining supplemental briefing and holding a hearing, concluded that it would not have imposed different sentences had it known the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory.

Appellants argue in this appeal that their sentences are procedurally and sub *637 stantively unreasonable. We AFFIRM. 1

DISCUSSION

A. Did the district court misapprehend the scope of its authority under Ameline?

Defendants argue that the district court erred on remand by (1) failing to consider every factor under 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) (“Section 3553(a)”); (2) giving presumptive weight to the Sentencing Guidelines; and (3) failing to state its reasons for imposing a particular sentence. In their view,…