context: Landers has not fallen on deaf ears. The Courts of Appeals that have addressed this issue -- the Second, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits -- have cited Landers with approval.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 142 F.3d 520, 525
citation_a.parenthetical: "In calculating the amount of 'improper benefit[ ]' [under SS 2E5.1(b
citation_a.sentence: See United States v. Glick, 142 F.3d 520, 525 (2d Cir.1998) (“In calculating the amount of ‘improper benefit[ ]’ [under § 2E5.1(b)(2) ] only direct costs, not indirect costs, should be subtracted from the gross value received.”); Sapoznik, 161 F.3d at 1119 (agreeing that fixed costs should be included in net value but finding it unclear whether the costs at issue were indeed fixed); United States v. DeVegter, 439 F.3d 1299, 1304 (11th Cir.2006) (“We agree with the Fifth Circuit’s approach which subtracts direct costs, but not indirect costs, from profits to determine the net improper benefit [under § 2B4.1(b)(l) ].”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 2 F.Supp.2d 592, 596
citation_b.parenthetical: "I hold that only 'direct costs' are deductible in calculating the amount of the benefit conferred [under SS 2B4.1(b
citation_b.sentence: See also Cohen, 171 F.3d at 803 (citing Landers generally); United States v. Leon, 2 F.Supp.2d 592, 596 (D.N.J.1998) (“I hold that only ‘direct costs’ are deductible in calculating the amount of the benefit conferred [under § 2B4.1(b)(l)]____ Indirect costs are not deductible.”).