in Rule 32 that were designed to ensure that the defendant is sentenced based on accurate information, Greer, 223 F.3d at 58; United States v. Gomez, 831 F.2d 453, 457 (3d Cir.1987), Rule 32(c)(1) plainly states that counsel for the defendant and the government must be provided with an “opportunity to comment” at the sentencing hearing on the information and conclusions in the PSI and “other matters relating to the appropriate sentence.” Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(1). The Supreme Court has, explained that the “opportunity to comment” language found in Rule 32(c)(1) provides for “focused, adversarial development of the factual and legal issues relevant to determining the appropriate Guidelines sentence.” Burns v. United States, 501 U.S. 129, 138, 111 S.Ct. 2182, 115 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991) (<HOLDING>). In the instant case, the District Court
holding that a district court must notify the parties that it intends to upwardly depart from the sentencing range established by the sentencing guidelines holding that conduct contained in dismissed counts may be considered by a district court in determining whether to depart from the applicable guideline range holding that the district court must give parties notice of intent to depart holding that a court may depart downward from the applicable guideline range under section 4a13 holding that district court must provide reasonable notice of intent to upwardly depart from guideline range