Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Carmen WICK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-03-14
Citations: 5 F. App'x 776
Docket Number: No. 00-50300; D.C. No. CR-94-00577-JSL-1
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Carmen WICK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before BROWNING, BRUNETTI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 5
Pages: 776–777

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Carmen WICK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-50300.
D.C. No. CR-94-00577-JSL-1.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 9, 2001 .
Decided March 14, 2001.
Before BROWNING, BRUNETTI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The district court did not clearly err in following the presentence report and giving Wick a two-level increase as an organizer or leader under U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(c). Wick, the only person with access to Medicare files, recruited another participant to the scheme and had complete control over the submission of false claims. Because she was the nerve center of the entire operation, her two-level increase was appropriate. See United States v. Alonso, 48 F.3d 1536, 1545 (9th Cir.1995); United States v. Varela, 993 F.2d 686, 691 (9th Cir.1993); United States v. Monroe, 943 F.2d 1007, 1019 (9th Cir. 1991).
The district court likewise did not err in giving Wick a three-level increase based on the total loss for her scheme. Wick did not dispute that she personally submitted 163 false claims, resulting in a total loss of $ 473,390.34. The three-level increase was therefore appropriate under U.S.S.G. § 281.1(b)(2)(d). The losses from the scheme were "reasonably foreseeable and thus properly included in the calculation." United States v. Melvin, 91 F.3d 1218, 1227 (9th Cir.1996).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.