that the newspapers and magazines will use the U.S. Mail to send such matter to them subscribers, and therefore, that such Defendant “caused” the use of the mails within the meaning of the mail fraud statute. See, e.g., Carpenter, 484 U.S. at 28, 108 S.Ct. 316 (“[U]sing the wires and the mail to print and send the [Wall Street] Journal to its customers” containing the column at issue “was not only anticipated but an essential part of the scheme.”); Atlas Pile Driving Co. v. DiCon Financial Co., 886 F.2d 986, 992 (8 Cir.1989) (“[I]t was almost certain that notice of [foreclosure sales] would be mailed to other claimants or that notice would be published in newspapers and copies of the notice distributed through the mails.”); United States v. Bowers, 644 F.2d 320 (4th Cir. 1981) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Shepherd, 587 F.2d 943, 944
holding that an increased sentence may be imposed for harms that were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendants conduct even where the defendant did not directly cause the specific harm holding that in order for a claim to be reasonably ascertainable the debtor must have in his possession at the very least some specific information that reasonably suggests both the claim for which the debtor may be liable and the entity to whom he would be liable holding that it was reasonably foreseeable that newspapers would be mailed to some subscribers containing the advertisements the defendant placed in the newspaper holding that it was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant that the letter he handdelivered to a newspaper in response to an advertisement would be sent by the newspaper to its customer via the us mails holding that an alien may be held in confinement until it has been determined that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future