Beyond simply counting predicate acts, RICO's pattern requirement demands that the acts be related to one another and that they demonstrate continuity — either 'closed-ended' continuity, meaning a series of related predicate acts extending over a substantial period, or 'open-ended' continuity, meaning the acts by their nature carry a threat of repetition into the future.

Relatedness looks at whether the predicate acts share common participants, victims, methods, or goals. Continuity is often the harder element to plead: a single scheme with a defined endpoint and no threat of repetition may satisfy relatedness but fail continuity, defeating the pattern requirement even where multiple predicate acts are alleged.

A Juricratic simulation represents pattern strength as a joint function of two sub-dials — relatedness and continuity — so a claim with clearly related but non-continuing conduct reads as structurally weak on pattern, distinct from a claim that fails on predicate acts themselves.

RICO litigators build a factual narrative connecting predicate acts by common actors, methods, and objectives, and separately develop evidence of either an extended timeframe or an ongoing threat, since courts dismiss pattern allegations that show only isolated, unrelated, or clearly concluded conduct.