OPINION & ORDER I. Introduction On October 23, 2018, plaintiff Kelco Construction, Inc., d/b/a Belco Pipe Restoration (“plaintiff” or “Belco”) commenced this action against defendants Spray in Place Solutions, LLC (“SIPS”), Jeffrey Sausele (“Sausele”), David Barnett (“Barnett”) and DTB RGK Consulting, LLC Corp. (“DTB”) (collectively, “defendants”), asserting claims for unfair competition in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a), and the common law; for racketeering in violation of the civil Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §1962(a); and under state law for misappropriation of trade secrets, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, defamation, tortious interference with contract, tortious interference with business relations and tortious interference with prospective economic advantage. Pending before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s civil RICO and breach of fiduciary duty claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim for relief. For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motion is denied in its entirety. II. Background A. Factual Allegations1 Plaintiff “is a leading provider of spray in place pipe restoration services, which involves using proprietary processes to clean and add a protective coating to piping and, in particular, municipal water pipes.” (Complaint ["Compl."], 10). “Spray in place pipe restoration offers substantial benefits over traditional open-trench excavation and restoration processes, including lower cost and faster return to service.” (Id., 11). Sausele and Barnett (collectively, the “individual defendants”) are plaintiff’s former project manager and director of business development2, respectively, (Compl.,
2, 12), “who were tasked with implementing a joint venture with a third-party, Utility Service Co., Inc. (‘USCI’), pursuant to a written Memorandum of Understanding (’2016 MOU’) related to Plaintiff’s proprietary spray in place pipe restoration process.” (Id., 2). Specifically, “[i]n or around 2016, Belco began negotiating a transaction with USCI, and its affiliated ‘SUEZ’ group of companies, wherein USCI would become the exclusive entity through which Belco would bid for and negotiate municipal contracts for pipe restoration throughout the United States (except for New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut), and Belco would become USCI’s exclusive supplier and/or subcontractor for spray in place pipe restoration.” (Id., 17). The individual defendants “were directly involved with Belco’s negotiations with USCI.” (Id., 18). On or about September 27, 2016, USCI and Barnett, on behalf of Belco, in his capacity as Belco’s “Director of Business Development,” executed the 2016 MOU, “memorializing their arrangement for a period of at least one year, continuing through at least September 27, 2017.” (Compl.,
