Trujillo

*684 MEMORANDUM **

Steven Trujillo appeals the district court’s dismissal of his retaliation claim, made pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . The district court concluded that because Trujillo was successful in a prior lawsuit on his claim for failure to promote on the basis of retaliation (“Trujillo I ”), he would potentially receive double recovery if he were successful in the present case (“Trujillo II ”). The district court held that Trujillo, in essence, already received compensation for his injuries in the jury’s verdict in Trujillo I. Therefore, the district court dismissed Trujillo II as barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Legal questions predominate in a district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim based on res judicata. Headwaters Inc. v. U.S. Forest Service, 399 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir.2005). Accordingly, we review the district court’s order de novo. Id. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand.

The doctrine of res judicata provides that a final judgment on the merits bars a subsequent action between the same parties over the same cause of action. See In re Imperial Corp. of America, 92 F.3d 1503, 1506 (9th Cir.1996).…