On appeal, defendant-appellant Eduardo Batista Barquín raises four issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to prove his knowledge and intent to defraud; (2) whether he was deprived of a fair trial based on the district court’s alleged cumulative errors in admitting the evidence of billing practices of a different company than the one for which Batista was prosecuted, giving a deliberate ignorance instruction, and allowing the prosecutor’s closing argument comments; (3) whether' the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial; and (4) whether the district court properly calculated the amount of loss and enhanced his sentence for obstruction of justice.

After careful review of the record and briefs, as well as having had the benefit of oral argument, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.