Anooshavan Sarkisian; v. Countrywide Home Loans;

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).
09-55538
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANOOSHAVAN SARKISIAN; et al.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees,
U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, as Trustee for Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-
ARI; et al.,
Defendants.
No. 09-55538
D.C. No. 2:08-cv-04447-R-CW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
FILED
JUL 13 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-55538 2
Anooshavan and Roobina Sarkisian appeal pro se from the district court’s
order dismissing their action seeking relief from foreclosure on their residence
under various federal statutes. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
may affirm on any ground supported by the record. ACLU of Nev. v. City of Las
Vegas, 333 F.3d 1092, 1097 (9th Cir.2 003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the Sarkisians’ action, which was
barred by the doctrine of res judicata because it arose from the same “transactional
nucleus of fact,” namely the Sarkisians’ loss of specified real property, as their
earlier state court action. See U.S. ex rel. Barajas v. Northrop Corp., 147 F.3d
905, 910 (9th Cir. 1998) (res judicata barred a claim where an earlier judgment had
resolved a different but related claim).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --