Volume 599 U. S. Part 1 Pages 533–554

OFFICIAL REPORTS OF

THE SUPREME COURT June 22, 2023

Page Proof Pending Publication

REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions

NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D.C. 20543, pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors. OCTOBER TERM, 2022 533

Syllabus

YEGIAZARYAN, aka EGIAZARYAN v. SMAGIN et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 22–381. Argued April 25, 2023—Decided June 22, 2023* Respondent Vitaly Smagin won a multimillion dollar arbitration award in 2014 against petitioner Ashot Yegiazaryan stemming from the misappro- priation of investment funds in a joint real estate venture in Moscow. Because Yegiazaryan has lived in California since 2010, Smagin, who lives in Russia, fled suit to confrm and enforce the award in the Central District of California pursuant to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The District Court ini- tially froze Yegiazaryan's California assets before fnally entering judg- ment against him. The District Court also entered several postjudg- ment orders barring Yegiazaryan and those acting at his direction from preventing collection on the judgment. While the action was ongoing, Yegiazaryan himself was awarded a multimillion dollar arbitration Page Proof Pending Publication award in an unrelated matter and sought to avoid the District Court's asset freeze by concealing the funds, which were ultimately transferred to a bank account with petitioner CMB Monaco. In 2020, Smagin fled this civil suit under the Racketeer Infuenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), which provides a private right of action to “[a]ny person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of ” RICO's substantive provisions. 18 U. S. C. § 1964(c). As relevant, Smagin alleges Yegiazaryan and others worked together to frustrate Smagin's collection on the California judgment through a pat- tern of wire fraud and other RICO predicate racketeering acts, includ- ing witness tampering and obstruction of justice. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that Smagin had failed to plead a “domestic injury” as required by RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Com- munity, 579 U. S. 325, 346. Smagin's Russian residency weighed heav- ily in the District Court's decision. The Ninth Circuit reversed. Re- jecting the District Court's rigid, residency-based approach to the domestic-injury inquiry, the Ninth Circuit instead applied a context- specifc approach and concluded that Smagin had pleaded a domestic injury because he had alleged that his efforts to execute on a California

*Together with No. 22–383, CMB Monaco, fka Compagnie Monégas- quede Banque v. Smagin et al., also on certiorari to the same court. 534 YEGIAZARYAN v. SMAGIN

Syllabus

judgment in California against a California resident were foiled by a pattern of racketeering activity that largely occurred in California and was designed to subvert enforcement of the judgment there. Held: A plaintiff alleges a domestic injury for purposes of § 1964(c) when the circumstances surrounding the injury indicate it arose in the United States. Pp. 541–549. (a) The “domestic-injury” requirement for private civil RICO suits stems from RJR Nabisco, a case in which the Court was asked whether RICO applies extraterritorially. To answer the question, the Court ap- plied the