Did the Second Circuit err by requiring Petitioner to object with specificity at sentencing and identify a particular provision of the plea agreement that had been breached by the government to preserve his claim for appellate review, and did the Second Circuit err in applying plain error review by considering only whether the government's breach was obvious at the time of sentencing?

1. Did the Second Circuit err by requiring Petitioner to object with specificity at sentencing and identify a particular provision of the plea agreement that had been breached by the government to preserve his claim for appellate review, in conflict with this Court’s precedent in Holguin -Hernandez v. United States , 589 U.S. 169 (2020)? 2. In applying plain error review, did the Second Circuit err by considering only whether the government’s breach was obvious at the time of sentencing as opposed to the time of appellate consideration , in conflict with this Court ’s precedent in Henderson v. United States , 568 U.S. 266 (2013)? ii LIST OF PROCEEDINGS This case arises from the following proceedings: United States v. Rivera , No. 22 -2081 (2d Cir. Aug. 21, 2024) (affirming the judgment) United States v. Rivera , 1:20 Cr. 600 (AKH) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2022 ) (sentencing and judgment) United States v. Michols Pena , 1:20 Cr. 600 (ER) (S.D.N.Y.) (pending) United States v. Johan Araujo , 1:20 Cr. 600 (AKH) (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2023 ) (judgment)