N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C U IT DENNIS D. W ILC OX, M .D., Plaintiff - Appe lla nt,
v. HI-DESER T M EM OR IAL HEALTHC A RE DISTR IC T, a C a lifornia c orporation, dba

Hi-De se rt M e dic a l C e nte r; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 13-55299 D.C . No. 2:11-c v-01994-M W F-OP
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia M ic h a e l W . Fitz ge ra ld, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d a nd Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 11, 2015 Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : GR

AB E R and WARDLAW , C i rc uit Judge s, a nd M AHAN, ** Distric t Judge
. Pla intiff De nnis D. W ilc ox, a phy sic ia n, a ppe a ls the distric t c ourt’ s dismissa l with pre judic e of this a c tion unde r 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a ga inst De fe nda nt Hi-De se rt 

# FIL E D FEB 23 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public ation a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The Honora

ble Ja m e s C
. M aha

n, Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the Distric t of Ne va d a , sitting by de signa tion.M e d ic a l C e nte r, whic h te rm inate d Pla intiff’ s hospital privile ge s. R e vie w ing de

novo, DoeNo. 14 v. Interne t B rands, Inc ., 767 F.3d 894, 896 (9th C ir. 2014), we
a ffirm
. 1. Pla intiff’ s a

rgum e nt tha

t the distric t c ourt e rre d whe n it sta y e d this a c tion pe nding there solution of sta te proc e e dings is moot, be c a u s e the sta

te proc e e dings have c o nc lude d . The re fore , we do not re a c h the m e rits of tha t a rgum e nt. 2. C la im pre c lusion ba

rs Pla intiff’ s fe de ra l c la im s. W e follow C a lifornia pre c lusion rule s. Kre m e r v. C he m . C onstr. C orp., 456 U.S. 461, 482 (1982). W e give pre c lusivee ffe c t to thede c ision of theJudic ia l R e vie w C om m itte e be c a

use (a ) it a c t e d in a

judic ia l c a

pa c i ty ; (b) it re solve d dispute d issue s of fa c t tha t we re prope rly be fore it; (c ) Pla i ntiff ha d a n a de quate opportunity

to litiga te his c la im s, inc l uding c onstitutiona

l c la im s; a

nd (d) the pe e r re vie w proc e e ding a nd this a c tion
are b e twe e n the sa

m e pa rtie s a n d involvethe sa

m e prim ary

right, spe c ific a lly

the right of Pla intiff to m a inta i n sta ff privile ge s at De fe nda nt hospital. Se e M ille r v. C ounty of Santa C ruz , 39 F.3d 1030, 1032–33 (9th C ir. 1994) (e xpla ining the
re quire m e nts for giving a n a dm inistra

tive a ge nc y ’ s de c ision pre c lusivee ffe c t unde r C a lifornia la w); Ta ka ha shi v. B d. of Trs. of Livingston Union Sc h. Dist., 783 F.2d 848, 851 (9th C ir. 1986) (holding tha t a n a dm inistra

t ive a ppe a l a nd subse q ue nt

2c onstitutiona l c la im arising from

the te rm ination of the pla intiff’ s e m ploy m e nt c ontra c t involve d the " ide ntic a l prim ary right" ). 3. The distric t c ourt c orre c tly dism isse d the sta te -law c la im s for fa ilure to e xha ust a dm inistra

tive re m e die s. Se e W e stla ke C m ty . Hosp. v. Supe rior C o urt, 551 P.2d 410, 411 (C a l . 1976) (holding tha t, a s a ge ne ra l rule , a

phy s ic ia n m ust e xha ust a ll re m e die s, inc luding judic ia l re vie w of a n a dm inistra

tive de c ision, be fore bringing a

n a c tion for re insta

te m e nt or da

m a ge s). Pla i ntiff is not se e king
re lie f unde r a

sta tute a s to whic h the re is a n " une quivoc a l[] " e xpre ssion of le gisla tive inte nt to a brogate the e xha

ustion re quire m e nt. Fa

hle n v. Sutte r C e nt. Va lle y Hosps., 318 P.3d 833, 841 (C a l. 2014). Ac c ordingly , e ve n a ssum ing tha t Pla i ntiff wa s a whistleb l owe r, his sta te -law c la im s a

re ba rre d be c a use he
a ba ndone d the a d

m inistra tive proc e e ding volunta

rily and fa ile d to se e k judic ia l
re vie w in sta

te c ourt. 4. W e have e xam ine d

Pla intiff’ s othe r argum e nts a n d find the m unpe rsua sive
. AFFIRM E D.

3