What is the standard of review of a sentence imposed by a federal district court?

In our procedural and substantive review of a sentence imposed by a district court, we apply a "deferential abuse-of-discretion standard." United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180, 189 (2d Cir. 2008) (en banc) (quoting Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007)). A district court commits procedural error where it (1) "fails to calculate the Guidelines range," (2) "makes a mistake in its Guidelines calculation," (3) "treats the Guidelines as mandatory," (4) "does not consider the [18 U.S.C.] 3553(a) factors," (5) "rests its sentence on a clearly erroneous finding of fact," or (6) "fails adequately to explain its chosen sentence." Id. at 190.