Thomas

MEMORANDUM **

Gary Thomas appeals his sentence for conspiracy, uttering counterfeit obligations, and aiding and abetting in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 , 471, 472. We review the district court’s implementation of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo, United States v. Webster, 108 F.3d 1156, 1158 (9th Cir.1997), the application of the Sentencing Guidelines to a particular case for abuse of discretion, United States v. Leon-Reyes, 177 F.3d 816, 824 (9th Cir. 1999), and factual findings in the sentencing phase for clear error, United States v. Ladum, 141 F.3d 1328,1344 (9th Cir.1998). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Thomas contends that the district court incorrectly calculated the amount of loss from his counterfeiting activities to be between $20,000 and $40,000, and, as a result, improperly applied a four-level increase in his offense level. See U.S.S.G. §§ 2B5.1(a), 2F1.1(D) & (E) (2000). The district court’s finding that Thomas was the source of $32,400.00 bearing the same serial numbers and made using the same method was not clearly erroneous, as it was based on relevant information with sufficient indicia of reliability. See United States v.…