Opinion
No. 09-7004.
Filed On: October 30, 2009.
Before: HENDERSON, ROGERS, and TATEL, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the response thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam).
Appellants' claims are barred by the doctrine of claim preclusion. Appellees in this case also were appellees in No. 08-7074,Nader v. Democratic National Committee. This court issued a final judgment on the merits in No. 08-7074, holding that Appellants' claims were barred by the statute of limitations.Nader v. Democratic Nat. Comm., 567 F.3d 692, 699-700 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Because this appeal involves the same parties and claims that were or "could have been raised" in the prior action, Appellants' claims are barred by claim preclusion. See Drake v. FAA, 291 F.3d 59, 66 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (quotingAllen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94 (1980)).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed.R.App.P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.