Massoudi

MEMORANDUM **

Aram Hanna Massoudi (“appellant”) appeals his conviction for (1) conspiring to possess and distribute pseudoephedrine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (d)(2) and § 846; (2) distributing pseudoephedrine in violation of § 841(d)(2); and (3) possessing pseudoephedrine in violation of § 841(d)(2). All three counts required knowledge that the pseudoephedrine would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, a controlled substance.

Massoudi argues that the District Court erred by (1) instructing the jury that appellant could be found guilty if he knew the pseudoephedrine would be used to *839 manufacture methamphetamine or “some other prohibited drug”; (2) finding that there was sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction; and (3) calculating his sentence to include 24.8 kilograms of pseudoephedrine not found in his possession. Finding no merit to these arguments, we affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we recount them here only to the extent necessary to explain our rulings.

DISCUSSION

1) Jury Instructions

The District Court instructed the jury, when explaining the knowledge requirement that attaches…