Terronez

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Anthony Ga-ston appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) arising from defendant’s alleged denial of adult diapers for one week. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s summary judgment on the basis of the doctrine of res judicata. Hiser v. Franklin, 94 F.3d 1287, 1290 (9th Cir.1996). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Gaston alleged the same claims against the same defendant in a state court action in which there was a final judgment on the merits. See Manufactured Home Cmtys., Inc. v. City of San Jose, 420 F.3d 1022 , 1031 (9th Cir.2005) (“To determine the preclusive effect of a state court judgment federal courts look to state law. California’s res judicata doctrine is based on a primary rights theory.” (citation omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

-phis disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.