Craig Cooper v. Felix Igbinosa

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Craig Brian Cooper appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims arising from his contraction of valley fever. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Cigna Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Polaris Pictures Corp., 159 F.3d 412, 418 (9th Cir. 1998). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Cooper’s claims against defendants Igbino-sa and Yates as barred by the doctrine of res judicata because Cooper’s claims were raised, or could have been raised, in prior actions between the parties that resulted in final judgments on the merits. See Stewart v. U.S. Bancorp, 297 F.3d 953, 956 (9th Cir. 2002) (setting forth elements of res judicata and explaining that the doctrine of res judicata bars subsequent litigation both of claims that were raised and those that could have been raised in the…