US v. Swor, No. 12-30250 (8-27-13)(per curiam with Kozinski, Berzon and Hurwitz).
A fraudster introduces investor to another fraudster: does the first fraudster owe restitution when the investors are bilked? No, said the 9th, because the introduction was not part of the fraudulent scheme. The first fraud involved a group of investors, the defendant, and a co-defendant. The defendant introduced other investors to the co-defendant, who, after the defendant ended his fraud, continued to defraud the investors in a separate scheme. The court could not order the defendant to pay restitution to the second group.