Rosa Sarausad v. University of Washington

96 F.3d 1451 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Rosa SARAUSAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-35930. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 9, 1996. Decided Sep. 10, 1996. Before: ALARCON, NORRIS, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 We affirm the summary judgment in favor of the University on the ground that appellant Sarausad's action is precluded by prior state court litigation. 3 We review de novo the district court's determination that claim and issue preclusion are available. Guild Wineries and Distilleries v. Whitehall Co., Ltd., 853 F.2d 755, 758 (9th Cir.1988). If we determine that issue preclusion is available, we review under an abuse of discretion standard the district court's decision to accord issue preclusive effect to the relevant decision. Plaine v. B.C. McCabe, 797 F.2d 713, 718 (9th Cir.1986). 4 Sarausad concedes that her employment discrimination…