FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 30 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MIGUEL E. DIAZ, No. 13-16318
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. 2:12-cv-00727-MCE-EFB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
GARY SWARTHOUT, Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Morrison C. England, Jr., Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 13, 2014**
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Miguel E. Diaz appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and
discrimination claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with a court order,
Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Diaz’s action for
failing to comply with the court’s order either to effect timely service upon the two
defendants that survived the court’s screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, or file a
timely amended complaint, despite being warned that the failure to do so could
result in dismissal. See id. at 642-43 (discussing factors relevant to dismissal for
failure to comply with a court order).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Diaz’s motions for
an extension of time because the court had already granted Diaz one extension and
Diaz failed to establish good cause for granting further extensions. See Ahanchian
v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1258-60 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth
standard of review for denial of extension of time and good cause requirement
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-16318