NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 19 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEREK TODD, No. 13-17593
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No.
2:13-cv-02231-JAM-CKD
v.
KEIRITH BRIESENICK, Officer B# 40; et MEMORANDUM*
al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 13, 2015**
Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Derek Todd appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Davis Police officers, Yolo County prosecutors,
and his son’s former tutor. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
review de novo. Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir.
2005 (dismissal under the doctrine of res judicata); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d
1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)).
We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because Todd’s claims were
raised, or could have been raised, in a prior federal action between the parties that
resulted in a final judgment on the merits. See Mpoyo, 430 F.3d at 987 (setting
forth res judicata elements and requirements for identity of claims); Stewart v. U.S.
Bancorp, 297 F.3d 953, 956-57 (9th Cir. 2002) (the doctrine of res judicata bars
subsequent litigation both of claims that were raised and those that could have been
raised in the prior action; dismissal for failure to state a claim is a “judgment on the
merits” for purposes of the doctrine).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-17593