Wolfe

MEMORANDUM **

South Coast Cab, Inc. and its owners Irene and Savvas Roditis (together “South Coast”) appeal from the district court’s final judgment rejecting their challenges to the City of Anaheim’s (“City”) procedure for awarding taxicab franchises. The final judgment includes, inter alia, an order granting the City’s motion to dismiss South Coast’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 causes of action and a subsequent order granting summary judgment in favor of the City on South Coast’s Sherman Act claim. South Coast appeals as the assignees of the *489 Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee, the named plaintiff, who disclaimed his interest in this appeal. We affirm.

The district court did not err in dismissing South Coast’s 42 U.S.C. § 1988 causes of action. South Coast lacked standing to challenge the franchise ordinance because it never applied for a franchise. Madsen v. Boise State Univ., 976 F.2d 1219, 1220 (9th Cir.1992) (collecting-cases). While South Coast argues that it would have been futile to have applied for a franchise, this issue was resolved against it in a related state court proceeding. Thus, South Coast is precluded from relitigating the issue here. See, e.g., Allen v. McCurry, 449…