Russo Bailey v. Warren Zimmer Robin Oeltjenbruns James Lendsay Kristeen McCollough University of California Regents

993 F.2d 881 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Russo BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warren ZIMMER; Robin Oeltjenbruns; James Lendsay; Kristeen Mccollough; University of California Regents, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-55888. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 27, 1993. * Decided May 6, 1993. Before BROWNING, KOZINSKI and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Russo Bailey appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his civil rights action on the ground that it was barred by the doctrine of res judicata. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. 3 We review de novo the district court's determination that an action is barred by the doctrine of res judicata. Robi v. Five Platters, Inc., 838 F.2d 318, 321 (9th Cir.1988). 4 The doctrine of res judicata encompasses the doctrines of issue preclusion and claim preclusion. Id. "Claim preclusion treats a judgment, once rendered, as the full measure of relief…