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 a r g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a )( 2 ). A cc o rd in g ly, A p p ellan t’ s r e que s tf oror a l a r gum e nti s de ni e d.

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 B R E N T S T E V E N S H E R M A N , S R ., P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 07- 35540 D . C. N o . CV - 0 6 - 0 1 7 8 0 - PA 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 orthe D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon O w e n M . P a nne r , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A pr i l5, 2010 ** B efo re: R Y M E R , M cK E O W N , an dP A E Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. B r e ntS t e ve n S he rm a n, S r . , af orm e rf e de r a l pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e ntdi s m i s s i ng hi s a c t i on a l l e gi ng c ons t i tut i ona l vi ol a t i ons 

# FI LED APR20 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 35540 2 i n con nect i on w i th the re vo ca t i on of hi s par ol e. W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 28 U . S . C . § 1 29 1. W e r evi ew de no vo a di sm i ss alun der 28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5(e) (2), H uf t i le v . Mi cc i o-Fon se ca , 4 1 0 F. 3 d1 1 3 6 , 1 1 3 8 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 5 ) , a n dw e a f f i rm. T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l ydi s m i s s e d the c l a i m s a ga i ns tthe gove rnm e nt d e f e n d a n ts u n d e rth e d o c tr in e o f is s u e p r e c lu s io n b e c au s e S h e rm a n s e e k s to litig a te i ss ues i dent i ca l t o o nes pre vi ou sl y l i t i gat ed and d ec i ded i n h i s f eder alhabeas ca se , Sh e rm a n v . R e illy , N o. 07- 35337, 2010 W L 55609 ( 9th C i r . J a n. 7, 2010) ( u n p u b lis h e dm e m .) . See H aw ki ns v. R isley , 984 F . 2d 321, 323- 25 ( 9th C i r . 1993) ( p e rc u r ia m ) ( c o n c lu d in g th a t p la in tif f w a s p r e c lu d e df

r o m r e litig a tin g c la im s in ci vi l ri gh t s a ct i on thatw er e pre vi ou sl y l i t i gat ed and d ec i ded i n h i s f eder alhabeas c a s e ) ; R e y n’s P as ta B e l la, L L Cv . V is a U SA , I nc . , 44 2 F . 3d 74 1, 74 6 (9th C i r. 20 06 ) ( l i st i ng el em ent s of i ss ue preclusi on ). T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd is m is s e dth e c la im s a g a in s t th e p r iv a te defe nd ant s bec ause S herm an’ s c on cl usory a l l egat i on s are i nsuffi ci entt o sho w that the s e de f e nda nt s c ons pi r e d w i th the gove rnm e ntde f e nda nt s ora c t e d unde rc ol orof la w . See S i m m o n s v. Sa cra m en to C o u n t y Su p eri o r C o u rt , 318 F . 3d 1156, 1161 ( 9th C i r . 2003) ( a f

f i rm i ng di s m i s s a l of

c i vi l r i ght s c l a i m a ga i ns tpr i va t e de f e nda nt w he r e the r e w e r e onl yc onc l us orya l l e ga t i ons of c ons pi r a c yw i th gove rnm e nt o f f ic ia ls ) ; se e al

so D i etri ch v. John A sc ua ga ’s N ug get , 54 8 F . 3d89 2, 90 0 (9th C i r.07- 35540 3 2 0 0 8 ) ( s ta tin g th a t c o m p la in ts to th e p o lic e d o n o t c o n v e rt p r iv a te p a rtie s in to go vernm entac t ors) . A pp el l ee E bers ol e’ s m ot i on for l eave t o app ear is g r a n te d . T h e c le rks h a ll f i l e the a ns w e r i ng br i e f

r e c e i ve d on N ove m be r26, 2007. AF F I RME D.