Whether the 'and' in § 3553(f)(1) means 'and' or 'or'

QUESTION PRESENTED The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Petitioner’s 60 month sentence imposed upon the denial of application of the safety-valve provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f), despite the fact that Petitioner’s criminal history score included only a single prior 3-point offense. It affirmed Petitioner’s sentence on the grounds that § 3553(f)(1) should be interpreted using a “distributive approach” to concluded that criminal defendants are “ineligible for safety valve relief under § 3553(f)(1) if they run afoul of any one of its requirements.” The question presented in this case is already before Court in Pulsifer v. United States, No. 22-340, 143 S. Ct. 978 (2023) (cert granted). The question presented here is: Whether the “and” in § 3553(f)(1) means “and,” so that a defendant satisfies the provision so long as he does not have (A) more than 4 criminal history points, excluding any points resulting from a 1-point offense, (B) a 3-point offense, and (C) a 2-point violent offense (as the Fourth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits hold ), or whether the “and” means “or,” so that a defendant satisfies the provision only if he does not have (A) more than 4 criminal history points, excluding any points resulting from a 1-point offense, (B) a 3-point offense, or (a 2-point violent offense (as the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Circuits hold)? 2