NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUN 06 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ALVIN ALEXANDERSON, No. 13-36140
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:13-cv-00813-HZ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JAMES GORDON MONROE; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 24, 2016**
Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Alvin Alexanderson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing on the basis of claim preclusion his action to quiet title. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Mpoyo v. Litton
Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.
*
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).
The district court properly dismissed Alexanderson’s action as barred by the
doctrine of claim preclusion because Alexanderson’s claims were based on the
same factual transaction at issue in a prior state court action and could have been
raised in that action. See Dodd v. Hood River County, 59 F.3d 852, 861-62 (9th
Cir. 1995) (explaining that federal court must give same preclusive effect to state
court judgment as it would have in the state it was rendered and setting forth
Oregon’s claim preclusion doctrine).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-36140