Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to below guidelines, 48-month term of incarceration on wire fraud charge based in part on two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice, where Dist. Ct. found that defendant had given false testimony to grand jury. While defendant argued that Dist. Ct. had failed to make adequate findings necessary for finding of perjury, govt.’s sentencing memorandum gave five specific examples of defendant’s false testimony, and Dist. Ct.’s comments strongly suggested that it had adopted govt.’s position and implicitly found that defendant’s grand jury testimony was false. Moreover, Dist. Ct. adopted presentence report that identified several false grand jury statements and observed that defendant had willfully obstructed administration of justice when testifying. Fact that defendant was not successful in deceiving grand jury was irrelevant.