Does a foreign plaintiff state a cognizable civil RICO claim when it suffers an injury to intangible property, and if so, under what circumstances

QUESTION PRESENTED In RJR Nabisco, this Court, applying the presumption against held that a civil RICO plaintiff states a cognizable claim under RICO’s private right of action only if it alleges a “domestic”—not foreign—injury. 579 U.S. 325, 354 (2016). The Court left unresolved, however, what legal test determines whether an injury is foreign or domestic. Id. (“[D]isputes may arise as to whether a particular alleged injury is ‘foreign’ or ‘domestic.’ But we need not concern ourselves with that question in this case.”). Since RJR Nabisco, the Courts of Appeals have divided three ways as to the proper legal test for assessing whether a foreign plaintiff suffers a “domestic” injury to intangible property—such as court judgments, arbitration awards, contract rights, patents, and business reputation or goodwill. The question presented is: Does a foreign plaintiff state a cognizable civil RICO claim when it suffers an injury to intangible property, and if so, under what circumstances.