A · Element outline
Labels preserve the recorded AND / OR / EXCEPTION / DEFENSE structure.
Claim structure
Expression key: & = AND; | = OR; ! = exclusion / negation. Parentheses preserve grouping.
18usc1962:(a)
person & (pattern & racketeering | debt) & investment & enterprise & commerce & !open-market-investmentSubsection (a) targets investment/laundering of racketeering income or unlawful-debt proceeds into an enterprise ("prize" or "investment target"). Civil plaintiffs must show injury flowing from the use/investment of racketeering income, not merely from the predicate acts.
18usc1962:(b)
person & (pattern & racketeering | debt) & acquisition & enterprise & commerceSubsection (b) targets acquisition or maintenance of an interest in or control of an enterprise ("victim" or "target") through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.
18usc1962:(c)
person & enterprise & commerce & association & conduct & (pattern & racketeering | debt)Subsection (c) is the workhorse RICO offense: conducting or participating in the conduct of an enterprise's affairs ("vehicle") through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.
18usc1962:(d)
person & conspiracySubsection (d) proscribes conspiring to violate subsection (a), (b), or (c). Under Salinas, requires no overt act and no personal agreement to commit two predicates, though civil (d) claims fail if the substantive (a)-(c) claim fails.
18usc1962:civil
((a) | (b) | (c) | (d)) & injury & causation & !x-statute-of-limitations & !x-release-prior-class-settlementPrivate treble-damages suit via 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) requires injury to "business or property" and both but-for and proximate causation ("by reason of").
Constraints
Under § 1962(c), the culpable "person" and the "enterprise" must be distinct entities, though a corporate owner/employee is legally distinct from the incorporated enterprise.
Applies to § 1962(c) ("employed by or associated with"), not necessarily to § 1962(a) where a corporate enterprise may invest racketeering income in itself.
Enterprise and pattern of racketeering activity are distinct elements, but the same trial evidence may support inferring both.
The enterprise is the "prize" or "victim" acquired or invested in under (a) and (b), but is the "vehicle" through which unlawful activity is conducted under (c).
Law modes, protocols and effects
law
Law kind: substantive
Statute text with element anchors
Overlapping highlights link to the first element; the anchor key links every associated element. All offsets refer to unchanged source text.
§1962. Prohibited activities
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. A purchase of securities on the open market for purposes of investment, and without the intention of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, shall not be unlawful under this subsection if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of his immediate family, and his or their accomplices in any pattern or racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt after such purchase do not amount in the aggregate to one percent of the outstanding securities of any one class, and do not confer, either in law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
(c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section. (Added Pub. L. 91–452, title IX, §901(a), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 942 ; amended Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, §7033, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4398 .)All element anchor links
- But-for and proximate causation ("by reason of", 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c)) — offsets [33:68]
- Civil RICO injury to business or property (18 U.S.C. § 1964(c)) — offsets [33:68]
- Culpable person (§ 1961(3)) distinct from the enterprise under (c) — offsets [33:68]
- Parol evidence rule raised to bar extrinsic evidence of fraudulent misrepresentations — offsets [33:68]
- Claim preclusion / release by prior class-action settlement — offsets [33:68]
- Statute of limitations (4-year civil under Agency Holding; 5-year criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 3282) — offsets [33:68]
- Pattern of racketeering activity (§ 1961(5)): at least two predicate acts with relatedness and continuity — offsets [135:169]
- Continuity of predicate acts (closed-ended or open-ended continuity) — offsets [135:169]
- Relatedness of predicate acts (horizontal and vertical relatedness) — offsets [135:169]
- Racketeering activity (§ 1961(1) enumerated state and federal predicate offenses) — offsets [148:169]
- Offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (§ 1961(1)(D)) — offsets [148:169]
- Conspiracy to commit a § 1961(1)(A) or (D) offense charged as a predicate act — offsets [148:169]
- Hobbs Act or state-law extortion predicate (18 U.S.C. § 1951; § 1961(1)(A),(B)) — offsets [148:169]
- Mail or wire fraud predicate (18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343) — offsets [148:169]
- Obstruction of justice / witness tampering predicate (18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512) — offsets [148:169]
- Fraud in the sale of securities predicate (§ 1961(1)(D)) — offsets [148:169]
- Interstate transportation of stolen or fraudulently obtained property (18 U.S.C. §§ 2314, 2315) — offsets [148:169]
- Collection of an unlawful debt (§ 1961(6)) — alternative to pattern of racketeering activity — offsets [181:211]
- Civil aiding and abetting a RICO violation (rejected as a private cause of action) — offsets [250:326]
- Use or investment of racketeering income in an enterprise (§ 1962(a)) — offsets [328:499]
- Enterprise (§ 1961(4)): legal entity or association-in-fact — offsets [500:514]
- Continuing-unit requirement for association-in-fact enterprise — offsets [500:514]
- Enterprise as an element distinct from the pattern of racketeering activity — offsets [500:514]
- Interstate or foreign commerce nexus — offsets [515:601]
- De minimis open-market securities investment proviso (§ 1962(a)) — offsets [603:1254]
- Culpable person (§ 1961(3)) distinct from the enterprise under (c) — offsets [1259:1294]
- Pattern of racketeering activity (§ 1961(5)): at least two predicate acts with relatedness and continuity — offsets [1303:1337]
- Collection of an unlawful debt (§ 1961(6)) — alternative to pattern of racketeering activity — offsets [1349:1379]
- Acquire or maintain interest in or control of an enterprise (§ 1962(b)) — offsets [1380:1457]
- Enterprise (§ 1961(4)): legal entity or association-in-fact — offsets [1458:1472]
- Interstate or foreign commerce nexus — offsets [1473:1559]
- Culpable person (§ 1961(3)) distinct from the enterprise under (c) — offsets [1565:1600]
- Defendant employed by or associated with the enterprise (§ 1962(c)) — offsets [1601:1631]
- Enterprise (§ 1961(4)): legal entity or association-in-fact — offsets [1632:1646]
- Interstate or foreign commerce nexus — offsets [1647:1724]
- Conduct or participate in the conduct of enterprise affairs (§ 1962(c) operation or management test) — offsets [1726:1820]
- Pattern of racketeering activity (§ 1961(5)): at least two predicate acts with relatedness and continuity — offsets [1829:1863]
- Collection of an unlawful debt (§ 1961(6)) — alternative to pattern of racketeering activity — offsets [1867:1894]
- Culpable person (§ 1961(3)) distinct from the enterprise under (c) — offsets [1900:1935]
- Conspiracy to violate § 1962(a), (b), or (c) (§ 1962(d)) — offsets [1936:2027]
- Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy bar against successive RICO conspiracy/substantive prosecutions — offsets [1936:2027]
Element outline
- AND Culpable person (§ 1961(3)) distinct from the enterprise under (c)
Under § 1962(c), a corporate defendant cannot be both the "person" and the "enterprise" (nor can it evade distinctness merely by defining the enterprise as the corporation plus its own employees/agents acting in the course of business).
5 merits instance blocks; 4 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 3 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 30 Used only in non-merits blocks (3).
Excluded context examples:Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedChang v. Chen — 80 F.3d 1293 (1996) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordeddistinct-from-enterprise
provisional; 5 observed casesWhether the defendant "person" is distinct from the "enterprise" (Cedric Kushner). 5
Satisfied 4; not satisfied 1; excluded context 14 Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — satisfied · triable (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: corporation-vs-network-of-owned-and-independent-distributorsUnited States v. Mongol Nation — 370 F. Supp. 3d 1090 (2019) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2019 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: unincorporated motorcycle club charged as the person; enterprise is the larger gang made up of the club plus additional individualsLlacua v. Western Range Ass'n — 930 F.3d 1161 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: membership association named as the person; enterprise pleaded as the association plus its own membersLlacua v. Western Range Ass'n — 930 F.3d 1161 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: association officer named as the person; the association he runs as the enterpriseSeville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: defendants-named-as-both-person-and-enterprise - OR Pattern of racketeering activity (§ 1961(5)): at least two predicate acts with relatedness and continuity
Alternative to `debt` ("or collection of unlawful debt"). Under H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell, statutory minimum of two predicates within 10 years is necessary but not sufficient: requires relatedness + continuity (`pattern.relatedness` and `pattern.continuity`).
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 8 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 80 Used only in non-merits blocks (8).
Excluded context examples:Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedNegrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedUnited States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_derivative
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element stands or falls with another element or claim and receives no independent analysis. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: predicate-acts/predicates-insufficiently-pleaded_pleading
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element fails or survives purely on generic pleading sufficiency (conclusory allegations, group pleading, Rule 9(b) particularity), without the court reaching any substantive sub-question. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Crest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: two-acts-per-defendant/boilerplate-group-pleading_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Republic of Kaz. v. Stati — 380 F. Supp. 3d 55 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Columbia · 2019 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: one scheme to inflate a plant's value and collect an arbitral award; one injury (legal fees); one victim- AND Continuity of predicate acts (closed-ended or open-ended continuity)
"Continuity" is both a closed- and open-ended concept: either a closed period of repeated conduct extending over a substantial period of time (typically >1 year, evaluated with multi-factor tests in single-victim/single-scheme fraud cases), or past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.
4 merits instance blocks; 2 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) closed-ended
provisional; 3 observed casesWhether a closed period of repeated conduct is long enough to show continuity (H.J. Inc.). 3
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 3; excluded context 12 Senior Health Ins. Co. of Pa. v. Beechwood Re Ltd. — 377 F. Supp. 3d 414 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: surviving predicates (misvalued performance-fee withdrawals) span 22 months, under the Second Circuit two-year floorMidwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not · no-evidence (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: continuity/cover-up-does-not-extend-schemeMidwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not · no-evidence (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: continuity/closed-ended-too-shortCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: continuity/closed-ended-too-shortopen-ended
provisional; 2 observed casesWhether the conduct by its nature threatens repetition into the future. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 11 Midwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not · no-evidence (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: continuity/open-ended-no-threat-scheme-ended-with-employmentCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: continuity/open-ended-conclusory-threat - AND Relatedness of predicate acts (horizontal and vertical relatedness)
Under H.J. Inc., predicate acts are related if they have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events; in criminal enterprise cases (Weisman), vertical relatedness to the enterprise's affairs also links disparate predicates.
2 merits instance blocks; 2 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; 3 observed casesThe element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 2
Satisfied 2; not satisfied 0; excluded context 22 Midwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — satisfied · conceded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: relatedness/single-scheme-against-one-victimUnited States v. Mathis — 932 F.3d 242 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: twelve gang crimes by shifting combinations of members sharing purposes and violent methodsUnited States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: relatedness/supplied-by-common-enterpriseUnited States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: relatedness/same-perpetrator-victims-goal-and-methods
- AND Continuity of predicate acts (closed-ended or open-ended continuity)
- AND Racketeering activity (§ 1961(1) enumerated state and federal predicate offenses)
(formerly `variant unmodeled/remaining-section-1961-1`) Explicit open catalogue: murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, narcotics, immigration-document offenses, financial-institution fraud, false statements, money laundering, and additional obstruction, securities, bankruptcy, and state-law predicates remain to be decomposed. Predicate offenses must fall within the exhaustive list in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1); the child entries below are a research subset, and the UNMODELED_PREDICATE_CATALOGUE is intentionally open rather than an implicit claim that the subset is complete. Fraud predicates must be pleaded with particularity under Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b).
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 5 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 50 Used only in non-merits blocks (5).
Excluded context examples:United States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedChang v. Chen — 80 F.3d 1293 (1996) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedReves v. Ernst — 507 U.S. 170 (1993) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_comparator
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is used as a yardstick for another statute or question, not applied to this case's own conduct. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Roe v. Howard — 917 F.3d 229 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · comparator/merits · not counted
Pattern: _comparator_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Republic of Kaz. v. Stati — 380 F. Supp. 3d 55 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Columbia · 2019 — not · law (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: litigation filings and payment of counsel's fees in arbitration-enforcement proceedings pleaded as mail fraud, wire fraud and money laundering- OR Offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (§ 1961(1)(D))
Enumerated in § 1961(1)(D) as "any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11".
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 United States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: bankruptcy-fraud/skimming-receipts-of-debtor-in-possession - OR Conspiracy to commit a § 1961(1)(A) or (D) offense charged as a predicate act
Distinct from § 1962(d) RICO conspiracy: a conspiracy to commit an offense within § 1961(1)(A) or ("any offense involving...") § 1961(1)(D) can itself count as one of the predicate acts of racketeering.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _procedural
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is only the occasion for a procedural ruling. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:United States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — not · assumed (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: conspiracy-as-predicate/harmless-if-excluded-substantive-predicates-suffice_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 United States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — satisfied · law (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: conspiracy-as-predicate/any-offense-involving-1961-1-d - OR Hobbs Act or state-law extortion predicate (18 U.S.C. § 1951; § 1961(1)(A),(B))
CONTEXT_ONLY: NOW v. Scheidler (510 U.S. 249) held only that a predicate need not have an economic motive and expressly reserved whether the alleged conduct was Hobbs Act extortion. The “obtaining property from another” test from Scheidler II is not quoted or modeled in this pilot.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler — 510 U.S. 249 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: hobbs-act-extortion/non-economic-motive - OR Mail or wire fraud predicate (18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343)
Most common civil RICO predicate; subject to Rule 9(b) particularity and resistance from courts where plaintiffs attempt to dress up an ordinary breach of contract as mail/wire fraud.
6 merits instance blocks; 5 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; provisional (1 case)no definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_pleading
accepted; 4 observed casesThe element fails or survives purely on generic pleading sufficiency (conclusory allegations, group pleading, Rule 9(b) particularity), without the court reaching any substantive sub-question. 3
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 2; excluded context 13 Fleetwood Servs., LLC v. Complete Bus. Solutions Grp., Inc. — 374 F. Supp. 3d 361 (2019) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: emails and ACH debits said to create the false impression that a usurious cash-advance agreement was enforceableSeville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: rule-9b-particularity/no-who-what-when-where-howMidwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: rule-9b-particularity/no-who-what-when-where-howCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: rule-9b-particularity/no-who-what-when-where-how_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Senior Health Ins. Co. of Pa. v. Beechwood Re Ltd. — 377 F. Supp. 3d 414 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — not · law (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: investment manager steering a client's funds into affiliated securities, pleaded as mail and wire fraudscheme-to-defraud
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the alleged conduct is a scheme to defraud at all. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: breach-of-contract-dressed-as-frauduse-of-mails
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether a mailing in furtherance is shown. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: mailing-not-incident-to-essential-part-of-scheme - OR Obstruction of justice / witness tampering predicate (18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512)
Perjury or discovery misconduct alone is not a predicate act unless it constitutes indictable obstruction of justice under § 1503 or witness tampering under § 1512.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Midwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: perjury-as-predicate/only-via-mail-fraud-or-section-1503 - OR Fraud in the sale of securities predicate (§ 1961(1)(D))
Criminal RICO and pre-PSLRA civil RICO include fraud in the sale of securities under § 1961(1)(D); note 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) (added 1995) bars civil RICO claims relying on conduct actionable as securities fraud absent a criminal conviction.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:United States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/lower-court · not counted
Pattern: securities-fraud/false-prospectus-and-secret-purchase-arrangements - OR Interstate transportation of stolen or fraudulently obtained property (18 U.S.C. §§ 2314, 2315)
Enumerated in § 1961(1)(B).
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: interstate-transport-of-fraud-proceeds/value-and-knowledge-not-alleged
- OR Offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (§ 1961(1)(D))
- OR Collection of an unlawful debt (§ 1961(6)) — alternative to pattern of racketeering activity
Unlike `pattern`, collection of an unlawful debt requires only a single collection of a debt arising from illegal gambling or usurious lending at >= 2x the enforceable rate (e.g. tribal payday lending cases such as Gibbs v. Haynes Invs.).
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Use or investment of racketeering income in an enterprise (§ 1962(a))
Under § 1962(a), the defendant must have received income from a pattern of racketeering (or unlawful debt collection in which the person participated as a principal under 18 U.S.C. § 2) and used or invested that income in an enterprise; civil § 1962(a) requires "investment injury" distinct from harm caused by the predicate acts themselves.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; provisional (1 case)no definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler — 510 U.S. 249 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: investment-injury/no-allegation-of-any-investment - AND Enterprise (§ 1961(4)): legal entity or association-in-fact
Turkette and Boyle govern association-in-fact enterprises: purpose + relationships among associates + longevity sufficient to pursue the purpose.
11 merits instance blocks; 10 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; provisional (1 case)no definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Midwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedassociation-in-fact
provisional; 10 observed casesWhether a group that is not a legal entity is an enterprise: purpose, relationships, longevity (Turkette, Boyle). 8
Satisfied 3; not satisfied 5; excluded context 47 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: no-existence-apart-from-fraud-schemeNegrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — satisfied · triable (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: manufacturer-and-distribution-networkFleetwood Servs., LLC v. Complete Bus. Solutions Grp., Inc. — 374 F. Supp. 3d 361 (2019) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: investors supply capital, a broker originates and a funder services usurious merchant cash advancesUnited States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · background/procedural · not counted
Pattern: organized-crime-parent-distinct-from-its-street-crewsNational Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler — 510 U.S. 249 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: non-economic-advocacy-coalitionBoyle v. United States — 556 U.S. 938 (2009) · Supreme Court of the United States · 2009 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/lower-court · not counted
Pattern: informal-crewBoyle v. United States — 556 U.S. 938 (2009) · Supreme Court of the United States · 2009 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: informal-crewlegal-entity
provisional; 3 observed casesWhether a corporation, cooperative or other legal entity is the enterprise. 3
Satisfied 3; not satisfied 0; excluded context 03 United States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: corporation-before-business-operations-beganReves v. Ernst — 507 U.S. 170 (1993) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 — satisfied · assumed (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: cooperativeCedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. King — 533 U.S. 158 (2001) · Supreme Court of the United States · 2001 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: closely-held-corporation- AND Continuing-unit requirement for association-in-fact enterprise
Associates must function as a continuing unit over time rather than committing isolated, uncoordinated offenses.
2 merits instance blocks; 2 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; 2 observed casesThe element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 2
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 1; excluded context 02 Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: continuing-unit/no-common-purpose-or-roles-allegedChang v. Chen — 80 F.3d 1293 (1996) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: continuing-unit/same-participants-repeated-transactions - AND Enterprise as an element distinct from the pattern of racketeering activity
Boyle's operative rule is that enterprise and pattern remain distinct elements, while an association-in-fact needs purpose, relationships, and longevity rather than an additional structure requirement.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; 2 observed casesThe element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 11 Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: distinct-from-pattern/enterprise-defined-only-by-predicate-actsBoyle v. United States — 556 U.S. 938 (2009) · Supreme Court of the United States · 2009 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: distinct-from-pattern/inferable-from-pattern-evidence
- AND Continuing-unit requirement for association-in-fact enterprise
- AND Interstate or foreign commerce nexus
A de minimis effect on interstate commerce by the enterprise's activities (including detrimental effects on victims engaged in commerce) suffices.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 3 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 30 Used only in non-merits blocks (3).
Excluded context examples:Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedUnited States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler — 510 U.S. 249 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: affects-commerce/detrimental-effect-without-profit-motive - EXCEPTION De minimis open-market securities investment proviso (§ 1962(a))
Express statutory safe harbor in § 1962(a) for open-market passive investment purchases totaling <1% of any class of voting/non-voting securities without power to elect a director. Note verbatim typo in statute text ("any pattern or racketeering activity").
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Acquire or maintain interest in or control of an enterprise (§ 1962(b))
Under § 1962(b), the acquisition or maintenance of interest/control in the enterprise must occur *through* the pattern of racketeering activity or unlawful debt collection, and civil plaintiffs must show "acquisition injury" distinct from predicate-act injury.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; provisional (1 case)no definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded - AND Defendant employed by or associated with the enterprise (§ 1962(c))
Covers both insiders ("employed by") and outsiders ("associated with") who exert control or participate in directing enterprise affairs, but excludes the enterprise itself.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 4 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 40 Used only in non-merits blocks (4).
Excluded context examples:Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedUnited States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedReves v. Ernst — 507 U.S. 170 (1993) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. King — 533 U.S. 158 (2001) · Supreme Court of the United States · 2001 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: employed-by/officer-and-owner - AND Conduct or participate in the conduct of enterprise affairs (§ 1962(c) operation or management test)
Reves v. Ernst & Young establishes the "operation or management" test: defendant must have some part in directing the enterprise's affairs (including lower-rung participants acting under upper management's direction, or outsiders exerting control via bribery). Merely furnishing professional services is insufficient.
7 merits instance blocks; 4 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 8 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 80 Used only in non-merits blocks (8).
Excluded context examples:Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedMidwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedUnited States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedoperation-or-management
provisional; 3 observed casesWhether the defendant took part in directing the enterprise's affairs (Reves). 6
Satisfied 2; not satisfied 4; excluded context 03 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: principals-of-schemeGoldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: outside-service-providersGoldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: peripheral-relatives-notary-and-later-purchaserGoldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: shell-entities-of-principalsNegrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — satisfied · triable (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: leader-directing-distribution-networkReves v. Ernst — 507 U.S. 170 (1993) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 — not · no-evidence (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: outside-auditorthrough-pattern-nexus
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the enterprise's affairs were conducted "through" the racketeering acts. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 United States v. Weisman — 624 F.2d 1118 (1980) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: through-pattern/fraudulent-financing-of-own-company - AND Conspiracy to violate § 1962(a), (b), or (c) (§ 1962(d))
Note tension in older or lower-court civil opinions (e.g. Goldfine) that sometimes recite a requirement that each defendant agreed to commit two predicates; Salinas controls in criminal and modern civil cases, though civil § 1962(d) still requires a viable underlying § 1962(a)-(c) violation and an overt act that is itself a RICO predicate under Beck v. Prupis (529 U.S. 494 (2000)).
5 merits instance blocks; 5 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 4 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 40 Used only in non-merits blocks (4).
Excluded context examples:Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedUnited States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedNational Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler — 510 U.S. 249 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_comparator
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is used as a yardstick for another statute or question, not applied to this case's own conduct. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:United States v. Jones — 935 F.3d 266 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2019 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · comparator/merits · not counted
Pattern: _comparator_derivative
accepted; 3 observed casesThe element stands or falls with another element or claim and receives no independent analysis. 3
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 3; excluded context 03 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: derivative-of-substantive-claim/substantive-counts-deficientMidwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not · no-evidence (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: derivative-of-substantive-claim/no-patternChang v. Chen — 80 F.3d 1293 (1996) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: derivative-of-substantive-claim/no-enterprise-allegedagreement
provisional; 3 observed casesWhether the defendant knowingly agreed to facilitate a scheme that would violate § 1962(a)-(c). 2
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 1; excluded context 12 Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: only-to-commit-predicates-not-to-further-enterpriseUnited States v. Mathis — 932 F.3d 242 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: gang founders and leaders who directed the enterprise without personally committing the robberiesGoldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/alternative · not counted
Pattern: conclusory-no-facts-of-knowing-agreement - AND Civil RICO injury to business or property (18 U.S.C. § 1964(c))
Damages must be concrete, clear, and definite (not speculative or unripe pending exhaustion of contractual/collateral remedies), and must be domestic under RJR Nabisco v. European Community (579 U.S. 325 (2016)).
5 merits instance blocks; 4 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 4 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 40 Used only in non-merits blocks (4).
Excluded context examples:Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedMidwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded_comparator
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is used as a yardstick for another statute or question, not applied to this case's own conduct. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Roe v. Howard — 917 F.3d 229 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · comparator/merits · not counted
Pattern: _comparator_whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 2
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Bascuñán v. Elsaca — 927 F.3d 108 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: foreign owner's funds stolen out of estate-owned New York bank accounts by his own agentBascuñán v. Elsaca — 927 F.3d 108 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: location of the accounts the fees were taken from not allegedbusiness-or-property
provisional; 2 observed casesWhether the harm alleged is injury to business or property. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 11 Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn — 604 U.S. 593 (2025) · Supreme Court of the United States · 2025 — satisfied · law (18usc1962: author: Flash1 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Excluded context examples:
Pattern: lost employment flowing from unwitting ingestion of THC (assumed to be an antecedent personal injury)National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler — 510 U.S. 249 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/procedural · not counted
Pattern: business-injury/clinic-operations-disrupted-by-threatsracketeering-injury
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether a distinct "racketeering injury" beyond harm from the predicate acts is required (Sedima). 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp. — 567 F. Supp. 1146 (1983) · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 1983 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: direct-injury/no-separate-racketeering-injury-requiredripeness-of-loss
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the loss is definite enough to sue on. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: not-ripe/secured-lender-has-not-exhausted-collateral-remedies - AND But-for and proximate causation ("by reason of", 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c))
Under Holmes v. SIPC (503 U.S. 258 (1992)), Anza, and Hemi Group, proximate cause requires "some direct relation between the injury asserted and the injurious conduct alleged".
2 merits instance blocks; 2 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; 3 observed casesno definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 30 Used only in non-merits blocks (3).
Excluded context examples:Midwest Grinding Co. v. Spitz — 976 F.2d 1016 (1992) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-v1-QA1.md)) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedCrest Construction II, Inc. v. Doe — 660 F.3d 346 (2011) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedReves v. Ernst — 507 U.S. 170 (1993) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recordedinvestment-injury-rule
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the injury flows from the use or investment of racketeering income rather than from the predicate acts themselves (§ 1962(a)). 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: injury-flows-from-predicate-acts-not-investmentproximate-cause
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the predicate acts directly caused the plaintiff's injury (Holmes, Anza, Bridge). 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — satisfied · triable (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: purchasers-via-intermediaries-outside-the-enterprise - DEFENSE Statute of limitations (4-year civil under Agency Holding; 5-year criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 3282)
Civil RICO claims are governed by a 4-year statute of limitations borrowed from the Clayton Act (Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff, 483 U.S. 143 (1987)), accruing under the injury-discovery rule (Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000)).
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; provisional (1 case)no definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:United States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted
Pattern: not recorded - DEFENSE Claim preclusion / release by prior class-action settlement
General affirmative defense litigated in civil RICO class actions.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — satisfied · law (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/procedural · not counted
Pattern: release/class-member-did-not-opt-out-separate-suit-predates-settlement - OR Civil aiding and abetting a RICO violation (rejected as a private cause of action)
Following Central Bank of Denver (511 U.S. 164 (1994)), most courts hold that 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) does not authorize private civil aiding-and-abetting liability under § 1962(c) (though criminal aiding and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2 applies, and § 1962(a) expressly cross-references 18 U.S.C. § 2).
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Goldfine v. Sichenzia — 118 F. Supp. 2d 392 (2000) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2000 — not · law (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: secondary-liability/no-private-action-for-aiding-and-abetting-rico - DEFENSE Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy bar against successive RICO conspiracy/substantive prosecutions
Evaluated under a totality-of-the-circumstances five-factor test (time, persons, statutory offenses, overt acts/predicates, locus/enterprise) to determine whether two indictments charge the same enterprise/conspiracy.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:United States v. Calabrese — 490 F.3d 575 (2007) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007 — not · pleaded (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/procedural · not counted
Pattern: successive-rico-conspiracy/different-enterprise-parent-organization-vs-subunit - DEFENSE Parol evidence rule raised to bar extrinsic evidence of fraudulent misrepresentations
Rejected as a bar to mail/wire fraud RICO predicates sounding in tort rather than contract enforcement.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Negrete v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America — 926 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (2013) · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2013 — not · law (18usc1962: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: state-evidence-rule/does-not-bar-fraud-based-rico-claim