not abrogate that sovereign power. Thus this Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate claims against the individual Defendants acting pursuant to Community and Business Council’s membership determinations. The Plaintiffs also claim that the individual Community Defendants are individually liable because they violated the Community ' Constitution, the Community’s Gaming Ordinance, and breached a “fiduciary duty” owed “to the Plaintiffs and all other similarly situated constitutionally qualified members of the Community.” (Amend. Compl ¶¶ 150, 153.) The duties — and corresponding scope of permissible authority — imposed under the Community Constitution, Community ordinances, and pursuant to any fiduciary obligations which may inure to the offices of the Business Council memb 8) (<HOLDING>); Ungaro v. Desert Palace, Inc., 1989 WL 199264
holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity holding united states government is immune from rico suit holding that state of nevada was immune from rico suit absent a waiver of its sovereign immunity holding an antiretaliation statute meaningless absent waiver of sovereign immunity holding state immune from suit brought in state court