the factor of “family and community ties” discussed under U.S.S.G. § 5H1.6. Thus, to the extent that cultural assimilation denotes family and community ties, we hold that the district court has the authority to depart on this basis in extraordinary circumstances. Under U.S.S.G. § 5H1.6, “[family ties and responsibilities and community ties are not ordinarily relevant in determining whether a sentence should be outside the applicable guideline range.” U.S.S.G. § 5H1.6. But under U.S.S.G § 5K2.0, such circumstances may be relevant if “present to an unusual degree” such that the case is distinguished “from the ‘heartland’ eases ... in a way that is important to the statutory purposes of sentencing.” U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0; see also United States v. Mondello, 927 F.2d 1463, 1470 (9th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Whether a defendant’s family and community
holding that a court may rely on factors listed in ussg  5h116 to justify a departure in extraordinary circumstances holding that appellate court in affirming trial courts decision may rely in part on a ground not presented to trial court recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice holding that a plaintiff may not rely on an unadorned stream of commerce theory to justify the assertion of personal jurisdiction over defendants holding that district courts may consider extraordinary acceptance of responsibility in weighing statutory factors