There is no suggestion that any of the plaintiffs’ photographs in these cases appeared in the Moving Cover Sequence. 36 . Greenberg v. Nat’l Geographic Soc'y, 97-3924-CIV (Lenard), 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18060, at *6 (S.D.Fla. May 14, 1998). 37 . Id. at *10. 38 . Greenberg, 244 F.3d at 1272. 39 . Id. at 1273. 40 . Id. at 1274 (emphasis in original). 41 . 533 U.S. 483, 121 S.Ct. 2381, 150 L.Ed.2d 500 (2001). 42 . E.g., Kremer v. Chem. Constr. Corp., 456 U.S. 461, 480-81, 102 S.Ct. 1883, 72 L.Ed.2d 262 (1982) ("[T]he judicially created doctrine of collateral estoppel does not apply when the party against whom the earlier decision is asserted did not have a 'full and fair opportunity' to litigate the claim or issue."); Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 95, 101 S.Ct. 411, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980) (<HOLDING>); Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147, 164
holding that this court may not review family court determinations that were decided after providing plaintiff a full and fair opportunity to litigate those issues holding that party to a default judgment had full and fair opportunity to be heard on the adjudicated issue even though the party did not put forth a defense because it did not timely serve an answer to the complaint holding that the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted must have been a party to the prior action holding that the concept of collateral estoppel cannot apply when the party against whom the earlier decision is asserted did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate that issue in the earlier case holding that it was fair to apply claim preclusion because the plaintiff did not show good cause for failing to bring its claims in the earlier lawsuit