Eddie Paul Munoz v. Clark County Business License Department

8 F.3d 28 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Eddie Paul MUNOZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CLARK COUNTY BUSINESS LICENSE DEPARTMENT, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-15154. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 3, 1993. * Decided Sept. 17, 1993. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and HALL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , Eddie Paul Munoz (Munoz), appeals pro se the district court's granting of summary judgment for defendant Clark County Business License Department (County). The district court found Munoz's complaint was barred under the doctrine of res judicata because the issues contained therein were litigated in a previous state court action, Munoz v. Clark County Business License Dep't et al., Case No. A302849. We review de novo, see Guild Wineries and Distilleries v. Whitehall Co., 853 F.2d 755, 758 (9th Cir.1988), and we AFFIRM. 3 In denying Munoz's writ of mandamus, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 34.170, the…