satisfy this latter burden, plaintiff must allege that he was ‘injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962.’ ” Id. at 17 (citations omitted). The defendants attack the Complaint under the second element set forth above, namely that the plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege two or more predicate acts sufficient to support a cause of action under RICO. The Complaint alleges essentially three separate categories of predicate acts: (1) mail fraud; (2) bribery; and (3) money laundering. 1. Mail fraud As this Court has recognized in the past, predicate acts based on some type of fraud, such as mail fraud must meet the more rigorous pleading requirements set forth under Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b). See, e.g., Morrow v. Black, 742 F.Supp. 1199, 1203 (E.D.N.Y.1990) (<HOLDING>). Rule 9(b) provides: In all averments of fraud
recognizing applicability of discovery rule recognizing the applicability of rule 9b under such circumstances recognizing the applicability of the mcdonough standard to federal criminal proceedings recognizing the presumptions applicability to federal statutes recognizing rule