US v. Doe, No. 15-10063 (11-29-16)(Garbis, Sr. D.J., with Silverman and Nguyen). 

This is an aggravated identity theft case.  The defendant was convicted of using the identity of a real person when he renewed his driver's license and submitted an employment eligibility form.  The defendant, still known as "Doe" because he has refused to provide his name and still has not been affirmatively identified, argues on appeal that the prosecution failed to prove that he knew the identity belonged to a real person.  The 9th holds that the evidence was sufficient to support such knowledge.  The 9th specifically holds that a defendant's repeated submission of false identifying information as part of successful applications to a government agency can sufficiently support such knowledge as circumstantial evidence.  The 9th also held that an upward variance from a guideline range of 18-24 months to 78 months (!) was not unreasonable.  The district court explained that the defendant had committed crimes under the identity and his theft caused serious disruptions to the victim and family.

The decision is here:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/11/29/15-10063.pdf