Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8645526
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Green v. North Seattle Community College
No. 8645526 · Decided November 19, 2007
No. 8645526·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
November 19, 2007
Citation
No. 8645526
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Appellant Riccardo Green appeals the district court’s judgment granting appellees’ motion to dismiss on res judicata grounds. This court reviews the dismissal de novo. See Maldonado v. Harris, 370 F.3d 945, 949 (9th Cir.2004). A review of the record and the opening brief indicates that the district court correctly determined that the claims raised by appellant in this action were barred by res judicata because the claims were either raised or could have been raised in appellant’s prior actions against appellees. See Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.1982). Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s judgment because the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). All pending motions are denied as moot. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Appellant Riccardo Green appeals the district court’s judgment granting appellees’ motion to dismiss on res judicata grounds.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Appellant Riccardo Green appeals the district court’s judgment granting appellees’ motion to dismiss on res judicata grounds.
02A review of the record and the opening brief indicates that the district court correctly determined that the claims raised by appellant in this action were barred by res judicata because the claims were either raised or could have been rais
03Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s judgment because the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.