Alisuretove appealed his sentence and restitution order. The panel, with one judge concurring in judgment, affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded. The majority affirmed the loss calculation for sentencing purposes as evidence at the sentencing hearing established that Alisuretove joined the conspiracy near the beginning, his guilty plea established the use and knowledge of card number skimming devices and it was reasonably foreseeable that his coconspirators were doing something illegal to get card information. It reversed and remanded on the restitution award as the district court made no findings that any entities beyond the five charged in the indictment were actually harmed and failed to determine the temporal limits to the charged criminal conduct and these factual issues must be resolved on remand before an appropriate restitution award may be ordered. The concurrence in judgment argued that even if Alisuretove is right in his arguments about loss calculation, there is no harm as the guideline range remains the same and the record lacks sufficient findings to support the restitution ward and remand is thus necessary under the statute and precedent.