Taylor v. Mikacich
This text of 54 F. App'x 469 (Taylor v. Mikacich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Michael Taylor appeals pro se the judgment of the district court dismissing his action alleging violations of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1964, by means of attempted extortion, mail fraud, publication of nonexistent judicial decisions, and tampering with court records.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we review de novo, Howard v. America Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, 746 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly determined that Taylor failed to state a RICO claim because the allegations in the complaint did not constitute a pattern of racketeering activity, nor did they set forth a tangible financial loss or injury. See id.; Chaset v. Fleer/Skybox Int’l., LP, 300 F.3d 1083, 1087 (9th Cir.2002). Because the events which formed the basis for Taylor’s allegations could not form the basis for a RICO claim, the district court properly denied leave to amend. See Chaset, 300 F.3d at 1088.
We conclude that Taylor’s remaining contentions lack merit.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
54 F. App'x 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-mikacich-ca9-2003.