Satcher

MEMORANDUM **

Rick Satcher appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his action alleging violations under the Racketeer' Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 (“RICO”), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , in connection with his grandfather’s state court guardianship proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the dismissal of the RICO claim de novo. Howard v. America Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, 746 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

The second amended complaint alleges defendants used wire and mail services as part of a scheme to encumber Satcher’s property and interfere with his business. To state a valid RICO claim, Satcher was required to allege “(1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.” See Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Corp., 473 U.S. 479, 496 , 105 S.Ct. 3275 , 87 L.Ed.2d 346 (1985). The district court correctly dismissed the RICO claim because Satcher, at a minimum, failed to sufficiently allege a pattern of racketeering activity. See Turner v. Cook, 362 F.3d 1219, 1230-31 (9th Cir. 2004) (a valid RICO claim must allege acts of mail and wire fraud that involve a threat of future criminal…