In United States v. Elliott (1978), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit announced that 'through RICO, Congress intended to authorize the single prosecution of a multifaceted, diversified conspiracy by replacing the inadequate 'wheel' and 'chain' rationales (of traditional conspiracy theory) with a new statutory concept: the enterprise.' In the 5 years that have followed this decision, Federal appellate courts, including that of the Fifth Circuit, have struggled with the parameters of RICO. Although the opinions have been conflicting in their attempts to reconcile RICO's 'group enterprise' and 'conspiracy' concepts with prior conspiracy doctrine, a trend has emerged. This trend rejects the ideas espoused in the Elliott decision and returns to traditional conspiracy principles in determining complicity in multidefendant RICO prosecutions. This trend is evidenced in the increased use by courts of traditional conspiracy concepts such as 'common purpose' and 'consciousness of scope' in applying RICO's 'group enterprise' and 'conspiracy' notions. Moverover, the U.S. Department of Justice in its policy statements has embraced judicial opinions that have applied traditional conspiracy principles in interpreting RICO. A total of 112 footnotes are provided. (Author summary modified)