ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

On April 3, 2013, the court sentenced defendant James Harlan Peters to a 60-month term of imprisonment and a 48-month supervised release term. ECF No. 33. Peters began his term of supervised release on May 20, 2015, and now moves for early termination under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1). Mot., ECF No. 49.

The court requires additional information to rule on Peters' motion. Specifically, although Peters cites the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors this court must consider in deciding this motion, he provides no substantive discussion of those factors or how they should be applied here. See Mot. at 2-3; 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(1) (permitting a court to terminate a defendant's term of supervised release "after the expiration of one year of supervised release" and following consideration of factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3353(a)).1 Similarly, Peters cites nine factors United States Probation Officers apply to determine "the suitability of early termination for offenders," but does not discuss or apply those factors, or clarify how they inform the court's decision. See Mot. at 2; Admin. Office of the United States Courts' Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volume 8, Part E, § 380.10 (2012) ("Probation Guide"), available at http://jnet.ao.dcn/policy-guidance/guide-judiciary-policy/volume-8-probation-and-pretrial-services/part-e-supervision-federal-offenders-monograph-109/ch-3-supervision-assessment-and-planning-process#380_10. Those factors include, inter alia, whether the defendant played an "aggravated role in the offense of conviction" and whether the defendant has a "history of violence," both of which may be relevant here but are not addressed, if they in fact guide the court's consideration. See Probation Guide § 380.10(b)(3)-(4). Furthermore, Peters cites as a basis for his request that he will obtain a contractor's license in September of this year, but he provides no documentation or information supporting that representation. See id. at 1. Likewise, he explains that he lives with his fiancé in the Eastern District of California, yet he provides no information confirming that his current and future housing plans are stable, see id., against a backdrop of what the court understands from Probation has been significant residential instability.

Peters seeks "the benefit of early termination" and thus bears the burden of "demonstrat[ing] that such a course of action is justified." See United States v. Weber, 451 F.3d 552, 559 n.9 (9th Cir. 2006). The court will permit Peters to file a supplemental brief within seven days that addresses the concerns identified in this order. The brief may not exceed ten pages. The United States may file a response, if any, within seven days of Peters' supplemental brief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.