§ 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct); and (B) who is unusually vulnerable due to. age, physical or mental condition, or who is otherwise particularly susceptible to the criminal conduct. Subsection (b) applies to offenses involving an unusually vulnerable victim in which the defendant knows or should have known of the victim's unusual vulnerability. The adjustment would apply, for example, in a fraud case in which the defendant marketed an ineffective cancer cure or in a robbery in which the defendant selected a handicapped victim. But it would not apply in a case in which the defendant sold fraudulent securities by mail to the general public and one of the victims happened to be senile.” U.S.S.G. § 3A1.1, comment, (n.2). 3 . Compare United States v. Castaneda, 239 F.3d 978, 982 (9th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>) That is not the circumstance here where the
holding that the offense of sexual battery requires the state prove the victims lack of consent regardless of the victims age and charge the jury on the same holding the enhancement inappropriate for a mann act violation because the victims were typical of the victims the mann act was designed to protect   holding that mann act requires only that the defendants immoral purpose is only one of the dominant purposes holding that abuse of trust enhancement applied where defendant had discretion to engage in commodities transactions on victims behalf without victims supervision holding that the crime victims compensation act which compensated innocent victims of criminal acts was an attempt to remedy that situation and therefore applied retroactively