Krishna Reddy v. Medquist, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Krishna Reddy appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing her employment and RICO action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 2005), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Reddy’s claims against defendants MedQuist, Inc. and CBay Systems Holdings Ltd. as barred by the doctrine of res judicata because Reddy’s prior action in the District of New Jersey “(1) involved the same claim or cause of action as the later suit, (2) reached a final judgment on the merits, and (3) involved identical parties or privies.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

The district court did not err by considering the motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction filed by defendants Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. (“Philips”) and Rusckowski. Contrary to Reddy’s contention, the Southern District of California’s transfer of Reddy’s action did not preclude the Central District of California from considering personal jurisdiction because the transfer order only addressed venue and explicitly stated that defendants could reassert their remaining…