
    Louis CHASE, Plaintiff-Appellant/Appellee, v. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO; Gregory Teplansky, Deputy # 1686, individually and as a peace officer; Fernando Hernandez, individually and as a peace officer; and Ed Ripley, Deputy Chief, individually and as a peace officer, Defendants-Appellees/Appellants.
    Nos. 12-57147, 12-57185.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 9, 2015.
    
    Filed Feb. 13, 2015.
    Thomas E. Beck, Esquire, The Beck Law Firm, Los Alamitos, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant/Appellee.
    James H. Thebeau, Esquire, Deputy County Counsel, County of Kern, San Ber-nardino, CA, for Defendants-Appel-lees/Appellants.
    Before: GRABER and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and SHEA, Senior District Judge.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Edward F. Shea, Senior United States District Judge for for the Eastern District of Washington, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Louis Chase appeals the district court’s dismissal of this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Defendants County of San Bernardino, Deputy Gregory Teplansky, Officer Fernando Hernandez, and Deputy Chief Ed Ripley. Defendants cross-appeal the district court’s denial of sanctions. We affirm.

1. Reviewing de novo, Landers v. Quality Commc’ns, Inc., 771 F.3d 638, 640 (9th Cir.2014), we conclude that the district court correctly dismissed this action. For the reasons explained by the district court, claim preclusion barred all claims but one, and the statute of limitations barred the remaining claim.

2. “Given the district court’s wide discretion in determining whether Rule 11 sanctions are appropriate, we cannot conclude that the court abused its discretion in refusing to award sanctions in this instance.” Gotro v. R & B Realty Grp., 69 F.3d 1485, 1488-89 (9th Cir.1995).

AFFIRMED. Costs on appeal awarded to Defendants. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     