Kerry Fritz, II v. Phillip Garza

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 01 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KERRY D. FRITZ, II, No. 09-15566 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:07-cv-00377-OWW- DLB v. PHILLIP GARZA, KCSO Deputy; et al., MEMORANDUM * Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 16, 2010 ** Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Kerry D. Fritz, II, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to comply with the court’s orders. We have * 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). EN/Research jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992), and we affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action after Fritz filed a third amended complaint that failed to conform with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, where the district court specifically warned Fritz multiple times that failure to comply with Rule 8 would result in dismissal of his action, and properly weighed the pertinent factors for dismissal. See id. at 1260-61 (discussing factors that courts must consider in determining whether to dismiss for failure to comply with a court order). Fritz’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. EN/Research 2 09-15566