06-2154-cv

G a r c h a v. The City of Beacon

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

R U L I N G S BY SUM M A R Y OR D E R DO N O T HAV E PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO

S U M M A R Y O R D E R S FIL E D AF T E R JAN U A R Y 1, 200 7 , IS PE R M I T T E D A N D IS GO V E R N E D BY TH I S

C O U R T ' S LOCAL RULE 32.1 AND FEDERAL RULE O F APPELLATE PRO C E D U R E 32.1. IN A BRIEF

O R OT H E R P A P E R IN W H I C H A LITIG A N T C I T E S A SU M M A R Y O R D E R , IN EA C H PA R A G R A P H IN

W H I C H A CITATION APPEARS, AT LEAST ONE CITATION MUST EITHER BE TO THE FEDERAL

A P P E N D IX OR BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE NOTATION: "(SUMM A R Y ORDER)." A PARTY CITING

A SUMM A R Y ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF THAT SUMMARY ORDER TOGETHER WITH THE

P A P E R IN WHICH THE SUMM A R Y ORDER IS CITED ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY

C O U N S E L UN L E S S THE SU M M A R Y O R D E R IS AVAILABLE IN AN ELEC T R O N I C DATAB A S E

W H I C H IS PUBLICLY ACCE S S I B L E WITH O U T P A Y M E N T O F FEE (SUCH AS THE D A T A B A S E

A V A IL A B L E AT HTTP://WWW.CA2.USCOURTS.GOV/). IF NO COPY IS SERVED BY REASON OF

T H E AVAILABILITY OF THE ORDER ON SUCH A DATABASE, THE CITATION MUST INCLUDE

R E FE R EN C E TO THAT DATABASE AND THE DOCKET NUMBER OF THE CASE IN WHICH THE

O R D E R WAS ENTERED. At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of New York, on the 21st day of August, two thousand and seven. PRESENT: HON . GUIDO CALABRESI, HON . REENA RAGGI, HON . PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges, SATWANT S. GARCHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 06-2154-cv CITY OF BEACON, MR. R. SASSI, CHIEF OF POLICE ­ BEACON POLICE DEPARTMENT, MR. DONALD F. WILLIAMS, DETECTIVE ­ BEACON POLICE DEPARTMENT Defendants-Appellees.

SA T W A N T GARCHA, pro se, Beacon, N.Y.

FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES: JO H N F. MCKAY, III, Ruffo, Tabora, Mainello & McKay, P.C., Lake Success, N.Y.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this appeal from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (McMahon, J.), it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff-Appellant Satwant Singh Garcha, proceeding pro se, appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (McMahon, J.), dismissing his complaint sua sponte. We assume the parties' familiarity with the procedural history, facts, and issues on appeal.

We hold that the district court, in its order dated April 19, 2006, properly applied the doctrine of res judicata in dismissing the plaintiff's complaint. New York law governs this case. New York has adopted the transactional approach to res judicata. Under this approach, later claims arising out of the same factual grouping as an earlier litigated claim are barred, even if the later claims are based on different legal theories or seek dissimilar or additional relief. See LaTrieste Restaurant & Cabaret Inc. v. Village of Port Chester, 40 F.3d 587, 591 (2d Cir. 1994). Here, Garcha's complaint was rightly dismissed, because all his claims either were brought, or should have been brought, in his prior action.

We have considered all of Plaintiff-Appellant's arguments, and we have construed his pro se submissions liberally. See Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006) (per curiam). Having done so, we find them to be without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

For the Court, CATHERINE O'HAGAN WOLFE, Clerk of Court

by: Oliva M. George, Deputy Clerk