T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yf i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T M A L I C H A G B Y , I ndi vi dua l l ya nd on B e ha l f of A l l O the r s S i m i l a r l yS i tua t e d, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. T A R G E T C O R P O R A T I O N , a n dits wh o l l yo wn e ds u b s i d i a r i e s TARGET S T OR E S , T AR GE T F I NA NC I AL S E R VI C E S , T AR GE T B R AN DS T A R G E T . C O M, D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 55326 D. C . No . 2 : 0 8 - c v - 0 4 4 2 5 - GH KP JW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia G e or ge H . K i ng, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A ugus t28, 2009 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: B E E Z E R , H A L L an dT . G . N E L S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. 

# FI LED NO V 19 2009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

Pl a i n t i f f - ap p e l l a n tM a l i Ch a g b yap p e a l s th e d i s tr i c tc o u rt ’ s g r a n to f aFe d . R. C i v. P . 12 (b)( 6) m ot i on t o d i sm i ss i n favor of defendant -app el l ee s T ar get C orpor a t i on a nd i t s w hol l y - ow ne d s ubs i di a r i e s ( c ol l e c t i ve l y“ T a r ge t ” ) a nd the di stri ctcourt ’ s di sm i ss al of C hagb y’ s e nt i re com pl ai nt . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o ad is tr ic t c o u rt’s g r a n t o f am o tio n to d is m is s f o rf a ilu r e to s ta te ac la im . E dw ards v. M ari n P ark, Inc. , 356 F . 3d 1058, 1 0 6 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . W e m a ya f f irm o n a n yg r o u n ds u p p o rte db yth e r e c o r d . See O rs ay v. U

. S. D ep’t of Just i ce , 2 8 9 F . 3 d1 1 2 5 , 1 1 3 2 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 2 ) . We r e v i e w a d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d is m is s a l o f ac o m p la in t f

o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . H

e arns v . San B erna rdi no P ol i ce D ep’t , 5 3 0 F. 3 d1 1 2 4 , 1 1 2 9 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 8 ) . W e a f f i rm. T h e f a c t s o f th e c a s e a r e k n o wn t o th e p a rt i e s . We d o n o tr e p e a tth e m b e l o w.

I Th e d i s tr i c tc o u rtp r o p e r l yd i s mi s s e dCh a g b y ’ s 1 8 U . S. C. § 1 9 6 2 ( c ) RI CO c l a i m f orf a i l i ng t o s uf

f i c i e nt l ya l l e ge a n e nt e rpr i s e , the r e qui s i t e pr e di c a t e a c t s a nd th at th o se ac ts ca u se din ju ry to C h ag b y’s b u sin es s o r p ro p er ty. C h ag b y’s a r g u m e n t s th a tth e d i s tr i c tc o u rte rr e di n i t s a n a l y s i s a r e u n p e r s u a s i v e , a n ds o we a f f i rm.3 A T h e d i stri ctco u rth el dth atC h ag b y h ad i n su ffi ci en t l y al l eg ed an en t erp ri se be tw e e n T a r ge ta nd i t s a dve rt i s i ng a ge nc ybe c aus e C ha gbydi d notpr ope r l ypl e a d a “c o m m o n p u rp o s e ” a n da n “o n g o in g o r g a n iz a tio n ,” a s r e q u ir e din th is C ir c u it. See O dom v . Mi c r os of

t C or p. , 4 8 6 F .3 d5 4 1 , 5 5 2 (9 th C ir. 2 0 0 7 ) ( en b an c) . C h ag b y’s pl ea di ng s on b oth el em ent s are concl usory and m er el y i dent i fythe corre ctl egal l ab el s, rath er th an al l eg i n g fact s t o su p p o rtl i ab i l i ty. C hagb y’ s a l t ernat i ve theory thatan ent erpri se exi st ed betw ee n T ar get C o rp o rat i o n an di t s w h o l l y-o w n ed su b si d i ari es fai l s t o m eetth e d i st i n ct i v en ess r e q u ir e m e n t o f

c iv il R I C O c la im s . Se e, e . g. , L i v i ng D es i gns I nc . v . E . I . D upont de N e m ours & C o. , 43 1 F . 3d 35 3, 36 1 (9th C i r. 20 05 ). W e refu se t o em b race C h ag b y’ s assert i o n th atw e sh o u l di n fer an en t erp ri se f r o m th e a lle g e dp r e d ic a te a c ts . T h e f a ilu r e to in c lu d e “+ C R V ” la n g u a g e in advert i si ng ci rc ul ar s does notcr ea t e an o bv i ou s i nfer ence of fr aud, m uch l es s an i nf e r e nc e tha ta n e nt e rpr i s e w a s e s t abl i s he d t o pr opa ga t e tha tf r aud. B T he di s tr i c tc ourtc onc l ude d tha tC ha gbyf a i l e d t o a l l e ge the pr e di c a t e a c t s of m a il a n dw ir e f

r au dw ith s u f

f ic ie n t p a rtic u la r ity . See F e d. R . C i v. P . 9( b) . T he a lle g a tio n s in C h a g b y ’s c o m p la in t a r e c u r s o rya n df a il to id e n tif

yth e r e s p o n s ib le4

part i es , the exactnature of thei r i nv ol vem entand h ow the m ai l and w i re s w er e us e d. T he m e r e i nc l us i on of “ f a l s e ” a dve rt i s e m e nt s i n the c om pl a i ntdoe s not r e n d e rT a r g e t ab le to “p r e p a r e a n a d e q u a te a n s w e rf r o m th e a lle g a tio n s ,” th e m a in p u rp o s e o f

F e d . R . C iv . P . 9 ( b ) . O dom , 486 F . 3d a t553 ( i nt e rna l quot a t i ons om i tt ed). C T h e d istrict co u rt co n clu d ed th at C h ag b y f ailed to alleg e th at T ar g et’s ac t i on s had caused i nj ury t o C hagb y’ s busi ness or prop erty. T he $. 96 fe e that C ha gbypa i d w a s pr ope r l yc ha r ge d byT a r ge tunde rC a l i f orni al a w . I tdoe s not a m ountt o ac ogni z abl e i nj uryf orthe purpos e s of

aR I C O c l a i m be c aus e C ha gby pa i d the c orr e c ta m ounta nd w a s notove r c ha r ge d. II T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tlyd is m is s e dC h a g b y ’s d e r iv a tiv e R I C O c la im s . C ha gby ’ s othe rR I C O c l a i m s i nc l ude d c ons pi r a c y , r e s ponde a ts upe r i ora nd a i di ng and abett i ng cl ai m s. C hagb y’ s § 19 62 (d) c on spi ra cycl ai m w as prop er l y di sm i ss ed b e c au s e th e d e s ig n s o f

th e a lle g e dc o n s p ir a c yw o u ldn o t h a v e v io la te dR I C O . See H ow ard v. A m . O nl i ne, Inc. , 20 8 F . 3d 74 1, 75 1 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). H erre spon deat su p eri o r an dai d i n g an dab ett i n g cl ai m s w ere al so p ro p erl y d i sm i ssedb ecau se th o se c l a i ms c a n n o ts t a n di n th e ab s e n c e o f ap r o p e r l yp l e a d e dRI CO c l a i m.5 III Ch a g b y ’ s e n t i r e c o mp l a i n tw a s d i s mi s s e df o rv i o l a t i n g th e Fe d . R. Ci v . P. 8( a ) r e qui r e m e ntof

a“ s horta nd pl a i n s t a t e m e nt . ” C ha gbyw a i ve d thi s i s s ue on ap p e a l b yf

a ilin g to c o n te s t th e d is m is s a l in h e ro p e n in g b r ie f a n db yg iv in g it o n ly c u r s o rytr e a tm e n t in h e rr e p lyb r ie f . See B arnet t

v. U . S. A i r, Inc. , 228 F . 3d 1105, 1 1 1 1 n .1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ( e n b a n c ) ( n o tin g th a t th e N in th C ir c u it “c o n s is te n tly r e g a r d [ s ] is s u e s r a is e df o rth e f ir s t tim e in r e p lyb r ie f

s a s w a iv e d ” ) , re v’ d o n o ther gr ounds , 53 5 U . S . 39 1 (20 02 ). AF F I RME D.