Julianna Agardi v. City and County of San Francisco

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JULIANNA AGARDI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 12-17776
D.C. No. 3:12-cv-03475-RS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Richard Seeborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 22, 2014**
Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Julianna Agardi appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
her action alleging federal racketeering and constitutional violations in connection
with defendant’s implementation of Proposition N. We have jurisdiction under 28
FILED
JUL 31 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Agardi’s
request for oral argument is denied.

-- 1 of 2 --

U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal on the basis of res judicata. Mpoyo
v. Litton Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Agardi’s action as barred by the
doctrine of res judicata because Agardi raised, or could have raised, her claims in a
prior state court action. See Migra v. Warren City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 465 U.S.
75, 81 (1984) (to determine whether a state court judgment would bar an action in
federal court, a federal court must apply the res judicata law of the state in which
the judgment was entered); Fed’n of Hillside & Canyon Ass’ns v. City of Los
Angeles, 24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 543, 557 (Ct. App. 2004) (setting forth the legal standard
for res judicata under California law and noting that “[r]es judicata bars the
litigation not only of issues that were actually litigated but also issues that could
have been litigated”).
Agardi’s request to show cause and to order the federal government to
appear in this case, filed on October 8, 2013, is denied.
AFFIRMED.
12-17776 2

-- 2 of 2 --