Peck

MEMORANDUM **

Kyle K. Peck appeals from his sentence for bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 . We affirm.

Peck claims that the district court improperly included all his fraudulently obtained loans in the calculation of the amount of loss, which increased his offense level by nine. See U.S.S.G. § 2Fl.l(b)(l)(J) (2000). He argues that the amount should have been limited to the amount he actually gained by the scheme, and that the fraudulent loans he paid off with other fraudulent loans should not have been included. We review the district court’s calculation of loss for clear error. See United States v. King, 257 F.3d 1013,1025 (9th Cir.2001).

The district court did not clearly err. The “core rule” is that “loss is the greater of the actual or intended loss.” United States v. McCormac, 309 F.3d 623, 627 (9th Cir.2002) (quotations omitted); U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1, cmt. n. 8(b). The court properly included the amounts of fraudulently obtained loans paid off with other fraudulent loans in the intended loss, as each loan was part of the scheme to defraud and no legitimate payments were made. See United States v. Blitz, 151 F.3d 1002, 1012 (9th Cir.1998) (proper to include amounts…