ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

LARRY ALAN BURNS, District Judge.

This Court sentenced Sonia Rodriguez to 108 months in prison in 2014 after she pled guilty to conspiring to distribute 11.58 kilograms of pure methamphetamine. She's now filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) asking the Court to reduce her sentence because the advisory sentencing range for her crime under the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines") was lowered after she was sentenced.

The Court originally calculated Ms. Rodriguez's Guidelines as follows:

Her Adjusted Offense Level was 33, and with a Criminal History Category of VI, her advisory Guideline range was 235-240. For a variety of reasons — including, in particular, Ms. Rodriguez's then existing health problems — the Court varied from the low end of the Guideline range by 127 months, imposing a 108 month sentence.

Under § 3582(c)(2), departures or variances from the original Guideline sentence based on factors other than substantial assistance are not counted when calculating a defendant's revised Guidelines. See United States v. Aragon-Rodriguez, 624 Fed. Appx. 542, *3, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21377 (9th Cir. Nov. 19, 2015) (the only Chapter Five departure that counts in calculating a defendant's revised Guideline range under § 3582(c) is for substantial assistance).

Ms. Rodriguez is eligible for a reduction of sentence under § 3582(c) only if the low end of her revised Guideline range is lower than her original sentence. Here it is not. When the Fast Track departure and the 108-month variance are backed out of the revised Guideline calculations as they must be, the low end of Ms. Rodriguez's revised Guideline range is higher than the sentence the Court imposed.

Ms. Rodriguez is therefore not eligible for a sentence reduction under section 3582(c). Her Motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.