Derek Todd v. KEIRITH BRIESENICK, Officer B 40;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEREK TODD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KEIRITH BRIESENICK, Officer B# 40; et
al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 13-17593
D.C. No.
2:13-cv-02231-JAM-CKD
MEMORANDUM*
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).
FILED
MAY 19 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 13-17593
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 of 2 --