No. 25-7322October Term 2025Petition Pending
Ruslan Kirilyuk, Petitioner v. United States
Ruslan Kirilyuk asks the Supreme Court to review how federal sentencing guidelines are interpreted in his criminal case.
Case status
- Current stage
- Petition Pending
- Latest event
- Petition pending
- Decision timing
- No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.
- What it's about
Ruslan Kirilyuk asks the Supreme Court to review how federal sentencing guidelines are interpreted in his criminal case. He challenges the use of guideline commentary to increase a sentence based on intended financial loss that was never actually realized.
Question presented
1. Whether Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993), still accurately states the level of deference due to the commentary of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines? 2. Whether U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1’s reference to “loss”—undefined in the Guideline text governing petitioner’s sentencing—may be read through Application Note 3(A) to include “intended loss” the defendant never realized?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Petition pending
- Area
Criminal Procedure
Briefing
What it's about
Ruslan Kirilyuk asks the Supreme Court to review whether courts should defer to commentary accompanying the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. He also challenges using “intended loss” that was never realized to raise his sentence under the fraud guideline.
Argument
The petition for certiorari (the Court's decision to hear a case) has been filed, and oral argument has not been scheduled.
Impact
The case could affect people sentenced for financial crimes when a judge calculates losses beyond money actually lost. For example, a defendant’s sentencing range could change if an unrealized planned loss counts.
What is at stake in Kirilyuk v. United States?
The case asks whether guideline commentary can support a higher sentence based on intended financial loss that never occurred.
Who could be affected by the intended-loss question?
People sentenced in federal financial-crime cases could be affected when judges calculate losses for sentencing.
What happens next in Kirilyuk v. United States?
The Court may decide whether to hear the petition. Oral argument has not been scheduled.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Sep 3, 2026
- Method
- Methodology