Raymond Jackson, Sr. v. M. Osman

MEMORANDUM

Jackson asserts that Defendants acted with , deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The district court dismissed the claims against Dr. Bick and Dr. Aguil-era because Jackson had not exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to those claims, and it granted summary judgment to Dr. Osman. We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. See Olson v. Morris, 188 F.3d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir. 1999) (citing Tyler v. Cisneros, 136 F.3d 603, 607 (9th Cir. 1998)).

We grant Defendants’ unopposed request for judicial notice of the records from Jackson’s prior state court action in Solano County Superior Court, in which the claims against Dr. Bick, Dr. Aguilera, and Dr. Osman were dismissed with prejudice. In light of these earlier state court proceedings, we affirm on the ground that Jackson’s claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

I.

In California, claim preclusion applies when the cause of action in one proceeding is identical to the cause of action in a previous proceeding; the previous proceeding resulted in a final judgment on the merits; and the party against whom preclusion is being asserted was a…