The Ostrich Group (a total of $567,767). This provision provides that a defendant is responsible for: (B) in the ease of a jointly undertaken criminal activity (a criminal plan, scheme, endeavor, or enterprise undertaken by the defendant in concert with others, whether or not charged as a conspiracy), all reasonably foreseeable acts and omissions of others in furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, that occurred during the commission of the offense of conviction, in preparation for that offense, or in the course of attempting to avoid detection or responsibility for that offense.... U.S.S.G. § lB1.3(a)(l). The district court adopted the PSR, which described the scheme and Whitney’s involvement in detail. See United States v. Ortiz, 362 F.3d 1274, 1277 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Additionally, the district court specifically
holding sentencing court did not commit procedural error when record showed court had psr heard oral argument from both parties and was aware of section 3553a factors holding that district court may find facts to support both factors by adopting psr holding remand not required where district court relied on federal psr that incorporated facts from state psr not objected to by defendant to determine prior conviction was controlled substance offense for purposes of career offender sentence enhancement under guidelines holding that the district court may adopt facts contained in the psr without further inquiry if the facts have an adequate evidentiary basis and the defendant does not present rebuttal evidence holding that defendant adopted facts found in the psr by not objecting