*1
Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
*2
Nancy Hoang Le appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing her foreclosure-related action alleging a violation of Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 11(b) and various provisions of state law. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal on the basis of res
judicata,
Stewart v. U.S. Bancorp
,
The district court properly dismissed the action as precluded by the doctrine
of res judicata (claim preclusion) because Le alleged claims arising out of the same
loan transaction and related foreclosure proceedings against the same defendant, or
an entity in privity with the current defendants, in two prior federal actions in
which there were final judgments on the merits.
id.
at 956-57 (setting forth the
elements of the doctrine of res judicata, and noting that it bars subsequent litigation
of both claims that were raised and that could have been raised in the prior action);
Owens v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan
,
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal.
See Padgett v. Wright
,
Le’s “Informal Request,” filed November 20, 2013, is denied as moot. AFFIRMED.
Notes
[*] 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. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).