context: Finally, although Wright's dicta relating to pledges obviously should be followed because pledges are addressed by the text of Application Note 7(b),-Wright's dicta relating to "immediate recovery from the actual debtor" should be limited to cover the Chichy-iike situation where a criminal defendant in a fraudulent loan case procured the loan for a third party. If this latter piece of dicta were read broadly to apply to any situation where repayment was made immediately, then it contradicts other more tightly and cautiously reasoned circuit precedent.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: "the relevant point in time for determining the amount of loss in a fraud case is at the time the crime was detected, rather than at sentencing"
citation_a.sentence: See also United States v. Flowers, 55 F.3d 218 (6th Cir.) (“the relevant point in time for determining the amount of loss in a fraud case is at the time the crime was detected, rather than at sentencing”), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 261, 133 L.Ed.2d 185 (1995), a check kiting case.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 74 F.3d 107, 111
citation_b.parenthetical: refusing to permit a bank loan officer to deduct repayments made within about one month after discovery of the fraud by the bank
citation_b.sentence: See United States v. Scott, 74 F.3d 107, 111 (6th Cir.1996) (refusing to permit a bank loan officer to deduct repayments made within about one month after discovery of the fraud by the bank).