United States v. Armen Karapetian

MEMORANDUM

Armen Karapetian appeals from the 10-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for access device fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029 (a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Karapetian contends that the district court erred when it applied a four-level enhancement because the offense involved 50 or more victims. See U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(2)(B). The district court did not err because both the financial institutions and the account holders were victims as defined by the Sentencing Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 cmt. n. 1 & 4(E); see also United States v. Pham, 545 F.3d 712, 717 (9th Cir.2008) (“[I]t is not impermissible double counting to consider both [the banks and the individual account holders] as victims even if their losses are ultimately traceable to the same fraudulently obtained funds.”).

Karapetian also contends that the district court procedurally erred when it applied a four-level enhancement based on the amount of loss. See U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 cmt. n. 3(F)(i). Karapetian specifically contends that the district court failed to address the parties’ arguments regarding the loss amount and treated the Guidelines…