
    Raimi SHOAGA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A.P. MOLLER-MAERSK GROUP, aka Danish A.P. Moller-Maersk Gruppen, aka Firmaet A.P. Moller-Maersk, aka A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-17450.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 25, 2010.
    
    Filed June 17, 2010.
    Raimi Shoaga, Oakland, CA, pro se.
    John Collier Cox, John D. Giffin, Esquire, Keesal Young & Logan, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Raimi Shoaga appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action arising from his shipment of personal goods from Oakland, California to Lagos, Nigeria. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Stewart v. U.S. Bancorp, 297 F.3d 953, 956 (9th Cir.2002) (res judicata); McQuillion v. Schwarzenegger, 369 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir.2004) (collateral estoppel). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action as barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel because Shoaga has already litigated his claims arising out of the shipment of these goods. See Shoaga v. Bolsada, No. C 05-02213 SBA, slip op. at 3 (N.D.Cal. Dec. 11, 2006); see also Stewart, 297 F.3d at 956 (describing elements of res judicata); McQuillion, 369 F.3d at 1096 (describing elements of collateral estoppel).

Shoaga’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Appellees’ requests to strike and for sanctions are denied.

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