Barroga v. Board of Administration of California Public Employees' Retirement System

MEMORANDUM

Lucio A. Barroga appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action against the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (“CalPERS”) for reinstatement of his retirement and pension benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir.2004). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

Dismissal was proper because Barroga’s action is barred by a prior administrative decision, prior state court judgments, and prior federal court judgments under the doctrines of claim and issue preclusion. See Hydranautics v. FilmTec Corp., 204 F.3d 880, 885, 887-88 (9th Cir.2000) (setting forth federal claim and issue preclusion doctrines); Plaine v. McCabe, 797 F.2d 713, 718 (9th Cir.1986) (state administrative decisions are given preclusive effect if the administrative proceedings are conducted with sufficient judicial character and the parties have an adequate opportunity to litigate); Lucido v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.3d 335 , 272 Cal.Rptr. 767 , 795 P.2d 1223, 1225 (1990) (explaining California’s…