IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-20270
Summary Calendar
ONESIMO CEDILLO,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
SHEILA WIDNALL, Secretary of the
Air Force or Her successor in office,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CV-2470
April 18, 2001
Before GARWOOD, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Onesimo Cedillo, Texas state prisoner #512984, appeals the
district court’s grant of summary judgment for the Secretary of
the Air Force on his claims regarding the Air Force’s denial of
benefits and accrued leave upon Cedillo’s discharge from the Air
Force. Cedillo argues that the district court erred in granting
summary judgment for the Secretary on grounds of res judicata and
collateral estoppel. He also contends that the district court
erred in refusing to grant his request for a continuance under
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5 the Court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) and in granting a stay in discovery pending
its ruling on summary judgment.
This court reviews the district court’s grant of summary
judgment de novo. Hale v. Townley, 45 F.3d 914, 917 (5th Cir.
1995); Little v. Liquid Air Corp., 37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir.
1994) (en banc). The district court did not err in granting
summary judgment for the Secretary because Cedillo’s claims were
barred by res judicata. See Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94
(1980); Russell v. SunAmerica Sec., Inc., 962 F.2d 1169, 1172-73
(5th Cir. 1992). The district court did not abuse its discretion
in staying discovery pending resolution of the Secretary’s
summary judgment motion and in refusing to grant a continuance
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f). See Schultea v. Wood, 47 F.3d 1427,
1433-34 (5th Cir. 1995); Securities & Exchange Comm’n v. Spence &
Green Chem. Co., 612 F.2d 896, 901 (5th Cir. 1980).
AFFIRMED
2