Don't understand this. Durham had not brought a RICO action yet was trying to get the judge to rule sua sponte that Sussman was part of a common plan or action? I'd think that Durham would have, should have or WILL bring such charges against all the rest of them who conspired in the Russia collusion hoax.
"The Court will exercise its discretion not to engage in the kind of extensive evidentiary analysis that would be required to find that such a joint venture existed, and who may have joined it,” wrote Cooper, an appointee of former President Barack Obama. “While the Special Counsel has proffered some evidence of a collective effort to disseminate the purported link between Trump and Alfa Bank to the press and others, the contours of this venture and its participants are not entirely obvious.”
Attempting to link Sussmann to such a conspiracy — particularly when he isn’t charged with it — would “essentially amount to a second trial on a non-crime,” he said."
The judge is saying that Durham hadn't proffered enough evidence to conclude that a joint venture (judge avoids conspiracy word though it is a crime in of itself) took place but Durham hasn't ALLEGED a conspiracy or 'joint venture' or RICO in his complaint. If he had, he would have surely added co-defendants and entered additional evidence.
Regardless, this ruling DOES NOT preclude Durham from charging everyone else of bring involved in a conspiracy. Seems Durham asked the judge to do too much, i.e., rule that a conspiracy took place even though Durham nevrr formally allege that one had. This is simply a lying to FBI case.