T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T MANS E S UL L I VA N, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. C O U N T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A , th e S a n ta C lar aC o u n tyB o a r do f

S up e rv is o r s ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees, a nd T . P . R Y A N ; e t a l., D efen d an t s. N o. 08- 17469 D . C . N o . 5 : 0 4 -cv -0 2 0 8 9 -JW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia J a m e s W a r e , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a y25, 2010 ** 

# FI LED JU N 17 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 17469 2 B e f o r e : C A N B Y , T H O M A S , a n dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . M a ns e S ul l i va n appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s um m a ryj udgm e nt f orde f e nda nt s i n hi s 42 U . S . C . § 1983 a c t i on c ha l l e ngi ng the c ondi t i ons of c onf i ne m e nti n c ountyj a i l dur i ng hi s c i vi l c om m i tm e ntpr oc e e di ngs unde rthe S e x u a llyV io le n t P r e d a to r s A c t. W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o . C i t

y of M art i nez v . T

ex aco T radi ng& T

ransp. , Inc. , 353 F . 3d 758, 761 ( 9th C i r . 2003) . W e a f f i rm i n pa rt , r e ve r s e i n pa rt , a nd r e m a nd. T h e d istrict co u rt p ro p er ly g ra n tedsu m m ary ju d g m en t as to S u ll iv an ’s c l a i m s a r i s i ng f

r om hi s c onf

i ne m e nti n 1999 be c aus e thos e c l a i m s ha ve a l r e a dy b e e n litig a te d , o rc o u ldh a v e b e e n litig a te d , b yth e p a rtie s o rth e irp r iv ie s in s ta te c o u rt. See Su l l i va n v. Sa n ta C la ra C o u n t y B d. o f Su p erviso rs , N o . C V 8 1 2 4 2 7 , s lip o p . a t 1 ( C a l. S up e r . C t. O c t. 2 9 , 2 0 0 3 ) ( d is m is s in g S u lliv a n ’s c la im s w ith p r e ju d ic e ) ; see a l

so Kay v. C i t

y of R an cho P alos V

erdes , 5 0 4 F .3 d8 0 3 , 8 0 8 ( 9 th C i r. 20 07 ) ( desc ribi ng el em ent s of r es j ud i cat a und erC al i forni a l aw ). H ow e ve r , S ul l i va n’ s c l a i m s a r i s i ng f r om hi s c onf

i ne m e nti n 2003 a nd 2004 w ere n o trai sedi n th e st at e co u rtcase fi l edo n N o v em b er 4 , 2 0 0 2 , an dth u s, th o se c la im s a r e n o t p r e c lu d e d . Se e C la rk v . Y o s e m ite Cm ty . C o ll. D is t. , 785 F . 2d 781, 789 ( 9th C i r . 1986) ( “ T he doc tr i ne of r e s j udi c a t ae xt e nds onl yt o the f a c t s a nd cond i t i on s a s they e xi st ed atthe t i m e the j ud gm entw as re nd er ed, and t o the l egal08- 17469 3 r i ght s a nd r e l a t i ons of

the pa rt i e s a s f

i xe d bythe f

a c t s de t e rm i ne d i n the j u d g m en t . ”). A cco rd i n g l y, w e rev erse th e g ran to f su m m ary j u d g m en tas t o th o se cl ai m s, an drem an dfo r fu rth er p ro ceed i n g s. S u lliv a n ’s r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s a r e u n p e r s u a s iv e . T h e p a rtie s s h a ll b e a rth e iro w n c o s ts o n ap p e a l. AF F I RME D i n p a r t , RE V E RS E D i n p a r t , a n d RE MAND E D.