facts.” Cal. Civ. Pro. Code § 1062. This exception to the ordinary rules of claim

preclusion reflects a central purpose of the Declaratory Relief Act, “to provide

parties with a quick way of resolving disputes without the need to assert all claims

based on the same cause of action.” Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co., 28 Cal. 4th

2 First City’s request for judicial notice of the transcript of the first arbitration, Dkt. No. 39, is granted. 3 888, 902 (2002). Accordingly, although “a declaratory judgment is conclusive as

to the matters declared,” it is “not res judicata under the merger doctrine with

respect to matters not covered in the judgment that could have been raised.”

Aerojet-Gen. Corp. v. Am. Excess Ins. Co., 97 Cal. App. 4th 387, 410 n.6 (2002),

as modified on denial of reh’g (Apr. 2, 2002).

The present action does not fall within this exception to the ordinary rules of

claim preclusion. First City is not seeking “additional relief,” Cal. Civ. Pro. Code

§ 1062, in the sense of relief beyond that which it was already awarded. It is

attempting to relitigate “matters declared” at arbitration — namely, the meaning

and value of fair market rent — that it opted not to appeal directly after receiving

unfavorable arbitral awards. The Declaratory Relief Act does not so permit.

First City frames its argument for “rollover” CPI as an issue unaddressed at

arbitration and thus amenable to a new declaratory judgment. But the first arbitral

award made clear that fair market rent included all “economic terms” of the

Lease — a category of which CPI adjustments, designed to capture the natural

inflation in rental values over time, are a paradigmatic example. Had First City

objected to this definition of fair market rent, it could have challenged the first

arbitral award after it was issued. See Cal. Civ. Pro. Code §§ 1285, 1288. Instead,

having received a definition of fair market rent, First City agreed to a further

4 arbitration designed to calculate an exact figure for it. First City then allowed the

figure the arbitrator reached to go unchallenged as well. The role of CPI

adjustments in calculating fair market rent has therefore been fully litigated and

conclusively resolved. That First City neglected to make the arguments it now

wishes to make in support of rollover CPI is not a valid basis for avoiding the

application of res judicata.

AFFIRMED.

5