Opinion ID: 76624
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Kraft's Loss

Text: 25 Stating that the exact amount of Kraft's loss was difficult to define, the district court used Bracciale and Weinbaum's monetary gain as a substitute for Kraft's loss under § 2F1.1(b)(1). However, we conclude that the district court erred because a reasonable estimate of Kraft's loss based on existing information was feasible in this case. 26 In Snyder, this Court reversed a district court's loss calculation based on the defendants' gain. 291 F.3d at 1296. Prior to sentencing, the government obtained an estimated victim loss calculation from an accounting report prepared by a CPA at the direction of the U.S. Attorney's Office. Id. at 1295. Despite this, the district court found that a reasonable estimate of the victims' loss was not feasible because [i]t would require significant expenditures of time and resources to determine the large amount of detailed information and no such information [was] before [the] Court. Id. The district court thus found, sua sponte, the better calculation of the victims' loss would be to use the intended or potential gain attributable to the defendants. Id. This Court reversed, and concluded that the CPA's research suggested that a reasonable estimate of the victims' loss based on existing information [was] feasible. Id. at 1296. 27 Although the figures in the Gylling memo may not provide the precise loss suffered by Kraft, such precision is unnecessary under § 2F1.1. See id. at 1295-96. The loss amount in the Gylling Memo was based on the bill-backs received and paid by Kraft regarding food product that was improperly diverted from McLane to D&K. The Gylling Memo contained supporting documentation and was by no means speculative. Rather, the Gylling Memo represented a reasonable estimate of the victims' loss based on existing information, id., and the district court should have used the Gylling Memo as the basis for determining Kraft's monetary loss. 28 Therefore, we reverse and remand this case so that the district court may consider anew its loss calculations. Upon remand, we instruct that the district court use the Gylling Memo's projected loss figure of $1,031,123.35 as its starting point, but note that Bracciale remains entitled to challenge the individual bill-back numbers used in the Gylling Memo. The government is entitled to respond, and the district court shall then make fact findings as to the loss amount.