State prisoner Artis Robinson, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil complaint. The court dismissed his claim on the basis of res judicata and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, due to the expiration of the relevant statute of limitations period.

On appeal, Robinson submits copies of (1) the complaint he filed with the district court in the present case, (2) his objection to summary judgment (which he filed in the previous case, 9:05-cv-80861), and (3) grievance forms dated from 1999 to 2003 (which he filed with the Department of Corrections). He makes no new arguments and presents no specific reasons for his appeal. Liberally construed, his submission may be interpreted as an argument that neither res judicata nor the statute of limitations bars his claim, as-these were the district court’s two bases for dismissing the present case. See Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (“Pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys and will, therefore, be liberally construed.”).

However, it is clear that res judicata bars this action and the district court correctly found that Robinson delivered his complaint to prison officials after the expiration of the statute of limitations period.

AFFIRMED.