Daryoush Javaheri v. U.S. Bank, N.A.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 27 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DARYOUSH JAVAHERI, No. 20-56079
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:20-cv-07204-ODW-
RAO
v.
U.S. BANK, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 MEMORANDUM*
Master Participation Trust; DOES, 1 through
100, inclusive,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Otis D. Wright II, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 17, 2021**
Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.
Daryoush Javaheri appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising from foreclosure
proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Puri v. Khalsa, 844 F.3d 1152, 1157 (9th Cir. 2017) (dismissal under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)); Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985,
987 (9th Cir. 2005) (dismissal on the basis of res judicata). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Javaheri’s action as barred by the
doctrine of res judicata because Javaheri’s claims were raised, or could have been
raised, in his prior federal action, which involved parties in privity, and resulted in
a final judgment on the merits. See id. at 987-88 (elements of federal res judicata;
claims are identical if they arise from the same transactional nucleus of facts).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 20-56079