Mohammed Hossain v. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

Ninth Circuit

Mohammed Hossain v. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

382 F. App'x 557

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 3, 2010

Docket08-17754

StatusUnpublished

This text of 382 F. App'x 557 (Mohammed Hossain v. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mohammed Hossain v. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 382 F. App'x 557 (9th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mohammed Kamal Hossain appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging violations of federal and international law resulting from the unavailability of derivative non-refoulement status for his family. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Paulsen v. CNF Inc., 559 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir.2009), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1053, — L.Ed.2d - (2010). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Downs v. Hoyt, 232 F.3d 1031, 1036 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

Hossain’s action is precluded by both the doctrine of res judicata and the contractual obligations imposed by the settlement of his first action, as this action involves the same claims that Hossain raised or could have raised in his prior action. See Intl. Union of Operating Engrs. v. Karr, 994 F.2d 1426, 1429 (9th Cir.1993) (applying res judicata to bar action raising claims that were dismissed pursuant to a settlement agreement).

We do not consider Hossain’s arguments that are raised for the first time on appeal. See United States v. Cade, 236 F.3d 463, 467 (9th Cir.2000).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM **

Mohammed Kamal Hossain appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging violations of federal and international law resulting from the unavailability of derivative non-refoulement status for his family. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Paulsen v. CNF Inc., 559 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir.2009), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1053, — L.Ed.2d - (2010). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Downs v. Hoyt, 232 F.3d 1031, 1036 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

Hossain’s action is precluded by both the doctrine of res judicata and the contractual obligations imposed by the settlement of his first action, as this action involves the same claims that Hossain raised or could have raised in his prior action. See Intl. Union of Operating Engrs. v. Karr, 994 F.2d 1426, 1429 (9th Cir.1993) (applying res judicata to bar action raising claims that were dismissed pursuant to a settlement agreement).

We do not consider Hossain’s arguments that are raised for the first time on appeal. See United States v. Cade, 236 F.3d 463, 467 (9th Cir.2000).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

382 F. App'x 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mohammed-hossain-v-commonwealth-of-the-northern-mariana-islands-ca9-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack