NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 20 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT DEAN GRIFFIN, No. 17-35937
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:17-cv-05394-RBL
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ROBERT HERZOG, Deputy Director
Superintendent; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 12, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Robert Dean Griffin, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various
constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with court
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
orders. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Griffin’s action
because Griffin failed to file an amended complaint that complied with the district
court’s pleading instructions or indicate that he intended to stand on a prior
complaint. See id. at 1260-61 (setting forth factors for determining whether a pro
se action should be dismissed for failure to comply with the district court’s orders).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Griffin’s motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 22) and motion
for appointment of counsel (Docket Entry No. 29) are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 17-35937