DOJ-OGR-00007432.pdf

--- Page 1 --- The extracted text is: **Header:** Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 493 Filed 11/22/21 Page 2 of 6 **Page 2:** Page 2 of an offense." 18 U.S.C. § 3663(a)(2). That section also expressly includes, in conspiracy cases, "any person directly harmed by the defendant's criminal conduct in the course of the ... conspiracy ...." Id. A person is "directly and proximately harmed" by a commission of an offense when the offense is a but-for and proximate cause of their harm. See, e.g., United States v. Goodrich, 12 F.4 219, 229 (2d Cir. 2021) (describing the identical language in 18 U.S.C. § 3663A). The offense is a but-for cause if the defendant's conduct was "a necessary factor in bringing about the victim's harm." Id. And the offense is a proximate cause if the "harm was 'foreseeable' to a defendant." Id. While the loss must "arise from the specific conduct that is the basis of the offense of conviction," id. at 228 (internal quotation marks omitted), in the case of a conspiracy where an individual is convicted for an "overarching scheme," restitution is appropriate for "actions that were thin and necessary to that 'single scheme.'" United States v. Seabrook, 968 F.3d 224, 236 n.8 (2d Cir. 2020) (quoting United States v. Archer, 671 F.3d 149, 171-72 (2d Cir. 2011)). That includes the "reasonably foreseeable actions" of co-conspirators, because "the defendant's 'specific conduct' in a conspiracy includes his agreement to the 'common plan of the conspiracy." Goodrich, 12 F.4th at 228. These definitions of "victims" encompass a broader set of individuals than the set of people who are injured when all elements of an offense are met. In Goodrich, for instance, a securities broker-dealer "pleaded guilty to a conspiracy to manipulate" the share price of a sham company. 12 F.4th at 231. His co-defendants "arranged the sale of [the company's] shares outside the public market in a private placement," and the broker-dealer challenged his order to pay restitution for losses in the private placement, because they were not victims of his offense. Id. at 223. The private placement was not mentioned in his indictment, plea agreement, or plea allocation, id. at 228. **Footer:** DOJ-OGR-00007432