Edward H. Greenberg v. Painewebber, Incorporated

65 F.3d 174 RICO Bus.Disp.Guide 8887 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Edward H. GREENBERG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PAINEWEBBER, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-56602. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 16, 1995. * Decided Aug. 22, 1995. Before: ALARCON, FERNANDEZ and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Edward Greenberg appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his securities fraud action on res judicata grounds. Greenberg contends that PaineWebber, Incorporated ("PaineWebber") violated: (1) various anti-fraud provisions of the securities laws; 1 (2) the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1961-1968 ; and (3) the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the United States Constitution, by selling unregistered securities to him and using a deceptive marketing scheme. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 Greenberg contends that…