Where a person is convicted of fraud offenses arising from conduct consisting of two similar, yet distinct types of fraudulent activities that resulted in substantially different loss amounts, is it unreasonable for a court to ignore available information showing that the different activities resulted in dissimilar typical loss amounts and use a single figure, calculated by combining the losses caused by both types of activities, when estimating the amount of intended loss for calculating enhancements under Section 2B1.1(b) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Where a person is convicted of fraud offenses arising from conduct consisting of two similar, yet distinct types of fraudulent activities that resulted in substantially different loss amounts, is it unreasonable for a court to ignore available information showing that the different activities resulted in dissimilar typical loss amounts and use a single figure, calculated by combining the losses caused by both types of activities, when estimating the amount of intended loss for calculating enhancements under Section 2B1.1(b) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines? 1