MEMORANDUM **

1. The district court did not abuse its discretion in instructing the jury as to *808conspiracy. The instructions, read as a whole, adequately advised the jury that it had to find Mitchell to be a member of the conspiracy in order to convict him. See United States v. Shryock, 342 F.3d 948, 986 (9th Cir. 2003) (examining whether “the instructions as a whole” were misleading).

2. Mitchell contends that the district court erred by applying a 2-level sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 (2001). The transcript contains many inaudible segments, but it does show that the district court started with a base offense level of 6, applied an 8-level enhancement for loss and then used a 2-level downward adjustment for sentencing disparity. The ultimate offense level was 12, so even though the district court considered an obstruction of justice enhancement, it did not apply it.

AFFIRMED.