Opinion ID: 77633
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Grounds for Dismissal of Remaining RICO Claims: Lack of Standing

Text: 112 Ten other insurers also filed RICO claims as part of the amended ancillary complaint, but these insurers did not ground their RICO claims in specific predicate acts, as the law requires. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(1)(a),(b), 1961(5). Instead, they alleged that the receivership entities engaged in an as yet undetermined number of telephone conversations and or mailings involving an undetermined number of fraudulently procured policies. The insurers not only failed to identify the specific policies addressed in these mailings, they also failed to allege that they suffered any particularized harm as a result of the defendants' activities. The district court dismissed these two claims, counts XXII and XXIII, for failure to state a claim and for lack of standing. 16 We affirm the district court's decision on these same grounds. 113