Case Name: Anooshavan SARKISIAN; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS; et al., Defendants-Appellees, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-ARI; et al., Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-13
Citations: 387 F. App'x 711
Docket Number: No. 09-55538
Parties: Anooshavan SARKISIAN; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS; et al., Defendants-Appellees, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-ARI; et al., Defendants.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 387
Pages: 711–711

Head Matter:
Anooshavan SARKISIAN; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS; et al., Defendants-Appellees, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-ARI; et al., Defendants.
No. 09-55538.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 29, 2010.
Filed July 13, 2010.
Anooshavan Sarkisian, Glendale, CA, pro se.
Roobina Sarkisian, Glendale, CA, pro se.
Robert Edward Boone, III, Jennifer A. Jackson, Esquire, Litigation Counsel, Ka-mao Shaw, Esquire, Bryan Cave, LLP, Santa Monica, CA, for Defendants-Appel-lees.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Anooshavan and Roobina Sarkisian appeal pro se from the district court's order dismissing their action seeking relief from foreclosure on their residence under various federal statutes. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. ACLU of Nev. v. City of Las Vegas, 333 F.3d 1092, 1097 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the Sarkisians' action, which was barred by the doctrine of res judicata because it arose from the same "transactional nucleus of fact," namely the Sarkisians' loss of specified real property, as their earlier state court action. See U.S. ex rel. Barajas v. Northrop Corp., 147 F.3d 905, 910 (9th Cir.1998) (res judicata barred a claim where an earlier judgment had resolved a different but related claim).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.