Cervantes-Bravo

MEMORANDUM *

Jesus Cervantes-Bravo appeals his sentence of ten years following his decision to plead guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The parties are familiar with the facts of the case, so we repeat them here only to the extent necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the sentence.

Cervantes-Bravo’s counsel did not challenge the sentence below. We therefore review for plain error. United States v. Geston, 299 F.3d 1130, 1134 (9th Cir.2002). “A ‘plain error’ must be clear and obvious, ‘highly prejudicial’ and must affect ‘substantial rights.’ ” United States v. Siu Kuen Ma, 290 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993)).

We cannot say that the district court’s failure to examine Cervantes-Bravo’s eligibility for safety valve relief was plain error. In his plea agreement, Cervantes-Bravo agreed not to seek safety valve relief, and his counsel in fact requested a ten year sentence consistent with the mandatory minimum. Further, it *115 is not clear from the record whether Cervantes-Bravo’s cooperation…