With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Clifford Lee Willard appeals the 168-month sentence imposed on remand following his jury conviction for transporting a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, traveling with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2423(a) and 2423(b), and possessing and transferring a false identification document. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). We review de novo, United States v. Karterman, 60 F.3d 576, 583 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm. Willard contends that the district court failed to comply with Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c) by not stating the reasons for its finding of criminal sexual abuse warranting application of U.S.S.G. § 2A3.1. Upon review of the record, we find no error. See id. (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. ** This disposition is not

A: holding that under the circumstances of the courts former rulings the issue for review was adequately preserved
B: holding that former fedrcrimp 32c prohibits a court faced with a disputed fact in the sentencing report from adopting it without making a factual finding of its own
C: holding that sentencing court satisfies rule 32c where it adequately states and explains the disputed issue in the case
D: holding that an issue is preserved for appeal where the issue was sufficiently raised for the court to rule on it
C.