Mali Chagby v. Target Corporation

Plaintiff-appellant Mali Chagby appeals the district court’s grant of a Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss in favor of defendant-appellees Target Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively “Target”) and the district court’s dismissal of Chagby’s entire complaint. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir.2004). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. See Orsay v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 289 F.3d 1125 , 1132 (9th Cir.2002). We review a district court’s dismissal of a complaint for abuse of discretion. Hearns v. San Bernardino Police Dep’t, 530 F.3d 1124, 1129 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

The facts of the case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them below.

I

The district court properly dismissed Chagby’s 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (c) RICO claim for failing to sufficiently allege an enterprise, the requisite predicate acts and that those acts caused injury to Chagby’s business or property. Chagby’s arguments that the district court erred in its analysis are unpersuasive, and so we…