Patients alleged that a physician and affiliated medical providers performed unnecessary heart procedures and billed them through a racketeering enterprise. The district court denied the patients’ motion to remand and dismissed their civil RICO claims, reasoning that they had alleged only personal injuries rather than injury to business or property. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of remand because the Class Action Fairness Act’s local-controversy provision did not displace federal-question jurisdiction. It vacated the dismissal, however, because the complaint alleged economic losses from paying for unnecessary procedures and those losses could qualify as injury to business or property under RICO. The court did not decide whether the plaintiffs could prove the alleged scheme or satisfy every pleading requirement. It remanded for further proceedings, including consideration of an alternative argument concerning heightened pleading.