|LYNN A. JENKINS,
BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary
United States Department of Interior,
We review the district court's conclusions of law as to the applicability of res judicata de novo. Frandsen v. Westinghouse Corp., 46 F.3d 975, 977 (10th Cir. 1995). We also review de novo the district court's determination as to standing. Loving v. Boren, 133 F.3d 771, 772 (10th Cir. 1998). Based upon our review of the record, the parties' briefs, and the pertinent law, we conclude that the district court properly determined that Jenkins had no standing to assert his present claims against Secretary Babbitt. Because we conclude that Jenkins had no standing to bring the current action, we need not address Jenkins' contention that the Office of the Solicitor General, rather than the United States Attorney's Office, should have represented Secretary Babbitt in this action.
We AFFIRM the judgment of the district court for substantially the reasons stated in its oral ruling of February 9, 2000. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Entered for the Court
David M. Ebel
*. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
1. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.