ORDER

DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.

On April 10, 2017, defendant Bonnie Lynne Recinos was sentenced by this court, pursuant to the entry of her plea of guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, to the custody of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons for a term of 55 months and to pay restitution in the amount of $1,507,882.03, with a three-year term of supervised release to follow. (Doc. No. 109.)

On January 2, 2019, defendant Recinos filed with the court, on her own behalf, a "Motion for Downward Departure" based upon what she represents to be her "extraordinary post-offense rehabilitation efforts." (Doc. No. 116.) Therein, defendant Recinos seeks an eighteen-month reduction in the sentence imposed by this court in 2017. (Id.) However, defendant mistakenly contends that her motion for a sentence reduction is authorized by Rule 47 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure which merely relates generally to the filing of motions.

A district court generally "may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed [unless, inter alia,] expressly permitted by statute or by Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure." 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c); Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 819 (2010). None of the requirements for the reducing of a sentence set forth in Rule 35 or any other statute are satisfied here and none of the authorities cited by defendant in her recent filing support the granting of the requested sentence reduction. While a downward departure from the applicable advisory sentencing guideline range based upon post-offense rehabilitation may have been available to defendant at the time of her sentencing, it is simply not available to her now in the form of a reduction of her sentence regardless of her laudable rehabilitative efforts following her imprisonment.

Accordingly, defendant's January 2, 2019 motion for downward departure (Doc No. 116) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.