Mclaughlin

MEMORANDUM **

Cathleen N. McLaughlin appeals the sentence imposed following her guilty plea to wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 . We have jurisdiction to review the sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a) and 28 U.S.C, § 1291. Although the Sentencing Guidelines are now advisory under United States v. Booker, a sentencing court must consult them in determining an appropriate sentence. 543 U.S. 220, 259 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005); United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1278-79 (9th Cir.2006). The district court must calculate the Guidelines range accurately, and must comply with Fed. R.Crim.P. 32. See United States v. Mix, 457 F.3d 906, 911 (9th Cir.2006). We review the district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo, application of the Guidelines to the facts of the case for abuse of discretion, and factual findings for clear error. See Mix, 457 F.3d at 911 ; United States v. Ellsworth, 456 F.3d 1146, 1149 (9th Cir.2006).

As a preliminary matter, we hold that the district court complied with the requirements of Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 when it acknowledged McLaughlin’s objections to the presentence report (“PSR”), gave the parties an…