James Campbell v. Indymac Mortgage Services

MEMORANDUM

James P. Campbell and Cheri A. Stad-tlander appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) in connection with foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim and for an abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040-41 (9th Cir.2011). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

Dismissal of Campbell’s and Stadtlan-der’s RICO claims was proper because the specific allegations in their complaint did not set forth facts demonstrating the requisite pattern of racketeering activity involving more than one transaction, see Sever v. Alaska Pulp Corp., 978 F.2d 1529, 1535 (9th Cir.1992) (pattern requires more than one scheme with a “single purpose which happen[s] to involve more than one act taken to achieve that purpose”), and their remaining conclusory allegations failed to allege fraud with the required particularity, see Fed.R.Civ.P.…