The RICO act provides for private civil action to recover treble damages for injury. It is directed primarily at racketeering activities defined as acts chargeable under specific State criminal statutes; acts indictable under specific Federal criminal laws; and any offense involving bankruptcy, securities fraud, or drug-related activities punishable by Federal law. The act involves an extensive civil enforcement scheme. In the Sedima versus Imrex case, the Belgian company Sedima filed an action against Imrex in the U.S. District Court in 1982, alleging that Imrex inflated its purchase prices and costs by preparing fraudulent purchase orders and credit memos. The action was dismissed on the grounds that no RICO injury occurred, and the court's decision was upheld on appeal. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision in an opinion that broadens RICO's scope. The Supreme Court stated that RICO should be broadly interpreted in both its criminal and civil provisions. The Supreme Court not only authorized the use of RICO beyond Congressional intent but also federalized claims traditionally delegated to States. Although the Supreme Court left Congress responsible for correcting defects in the statute, it is envisioned that the courts will continue to find other ways to limit RICO. 130 references.