Sherman

MEMORANDUM

Brent Steven Sherman, Sr., a former federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging constitutional violations in connection with the revocation of his parole. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2), Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1138 (9th Cir.2005), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the claims against the government defendants under the doctrine of issue preclusion because Sherman seeks to litigate issues identical to ones previously litigated and decided in his federal habeas case, Sherman v. Reilly, 361 Fed.Appx. 827 (9th Cir.2010) (unpublished mem.). See Hawkins v. Risley, 984 F.2d 321, 323-25 (9th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (concluding that plaintiff was precluded from relitigating claims in civil rights action that were previously litigated and decided in his federal habeas case); Reyn’s Pasta Bella, LLC v. Visa USA, Inc., 442 F.3d 741 , 746 (9th Cir.2006) (listing elements of issue preclusion).

The district court properly dismissed the claims against the private defendants because Sherman’s conclusory allegations are…