Sanville

MEMORANDUM **

We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Sanville’s claims against the Bank of America and C. Joyce Berta.

I

It is unnecessary to decide whether San-ville had standing to bring a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), because both his complaint and his Civil RICO Case Statement failed to plead adequately the predicate acts of mail fraud ( 18 U.S.C. § 1341 ), wire fraud ( 18 U.S.C. § 1343 ), and money laundering ( 18 U.S.C. § 1956 ).

Sanville did not meet the strict requirements of pleading fraud under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) because he did not plead with sufficient particularity that the defendants had the “specific intent to deceive or defraud,” as required for both mail and wire fraud. See Schreiber Distributing Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co., Inc., 806 F.2d 1393, 1399-1400 (9th Cir.1986). This allegation need not be made expressly, see Sun Savings and Loan Assoc, v. Dierdorff, 825 F.2d 187, 195-96 (9th Cir.1987); rather, “[t]he requirement of specific intent under these statutes is satisfied by the existence of a scheme which was reasonably calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence and…