Lepe

Filiberto Lepe appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims as barred by res judicata. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we will not recount it here.

I

Lepe’s false arrest claim accrued on the date he was held pursuant to legal process, i.e. the date he was arraigned or bound over for trial. Wallace v. Kato, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 1091, 1096 , 166 L.Ed.2d 973 (2007). Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), did not delay the accrual of Lepe’s false arrest claim because under Wallace, a § 1983 claim for false arrest “begins to run at the time the claimant becomes detained pursuant to legal process,” even “where the arrest is followed by criminal proceedings,” Wallace, 127 S.Ct. at 1100 . The new rules announced in Wallace apply retroactively to Lepe because the Supreme Court applied these rules to the parties in Wallace. See Reynoldsville Casket Co. v. Hyde, 514 U.S. 749, 752 , 115 S.Ct. 1745 , 131 L.Ed.2d 820 (1995) (when the Supreme Court announces a new legal rule and applies it to the parties in that case, we must apply the new rule to all pending cases, even if those pending cases…