Rosalba Cisneros v. Petland, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · August 25, 2020 · No. 18-12064

Summary

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of a civil RICO claim arising from the sale of a sick puppy, holding that the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege an association-in-fact enterprise because the complaint described only a normal franchise business model, not a common purpose to defraud. The court also held that the plaintiff failed to plead a pattern of racketeering activity with particularity under Rule 9(b), as the alleged predicate acts of mail and wire fraud arose from a single transaction over eleven days and did not show continuity. The district court erred in declining supplemental jurisdiction over the Georgia RICO claim because the Class Action Fairness Act provided original jurisdiction, but the state claim was dismissed on the same merits as the federal claims.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Writing for the Court
MARCUS; BRANCH; UNGARO
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
August 25, 2020
Docket number
18-12064
Procedural posture
Appeal from dismissal of RICO claims under Rule 12(b)(6)
Standard of review
De novo review of Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal, accepting factual allegations as true and construing in light most favorable to plaintiff.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Rosalba Cisneros v. Petland, Inc., BKG Pets, Inc., Pets BKG LLC, PAWSitive Solutions, Inc.
Disposition
other

Topics

civil proceduremotions to dismissclass actionsappellate procedurestandard of reviewfraud

Practice areas

Civil ProcedureRICOClass Actions

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Cisneros plausibly alleged the existence of a RICO enterprise with a common purpose to defraud.
  2. Whether Cisneros plausibly alleged a pattern of racketeering activity with particularity.
  3. Whether the district court properly declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state RICO claim.

Holdings

  1. Cisneros failed to plausibly allege that the defendants shared a common purpose to defraud, as required for an association-in-fact enterprise.
  2. Cisneros failed to plead with particularity that the defendants engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, as the predicate acts were not sufficiently alleged and did not show continuity.
  3. The district court erred because the Class Action Fairness Act provided original jurisdiction over the state claim, so supplemental jurisdiction analysis was unnecessary.

Key quotations

A RICO enterprise is 'any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity.' (10)
An 'association-in-fact enterprise is simply a continuing unit that functions with a common purpose.' (10)
A plaintiff can do so either by alleging 'a series of related predicates extending over a substantial period of time' or 'the threat of continuity.' (22)

Factual background

Rosalba Cisneros purchased a Shih Tzu puppy from Petland Kennesaw on December 10, 2015, for $2,400. The puppy died within a week from parvovirus. Cisneros alleged that the defendants engaged in a nationwide conspiracy to sell sick puppies through a network of franchisees, preferred veterinarians, and PAWSitive, using fraudulent health certifications and sales practices.

Procedural history

The district court dismissed Cisneros's federal RICO claims for failure to state a claim and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her state RICO claim. Cisneros appealed.

Remand instructions

Dismiss the state-law claim with prejudice.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…