NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 18 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MAHMOOD YOONESSI, No. 16-56374
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:15-cv-09329-SVW-
AJW
v.
ANDRE KHANSARI, LACBA; et al., MEMORANDUM*
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 11, 2017**
Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Mahmood Yoonessi appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing for failure to prosecute his action alleging federal and state law claims.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of
discretion a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d
*
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).
1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Yoonesi’s action
with prejudice after weighing the pertinent factors and evaluating alternatives to
dismissal. See id. at 1260-63 (setting forth factors for determining whether a pro
se action should be dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Defendant Prudential Mortgage Capital Company, Now Known As PGIM
Real Estate Finance, LLC.’s pending motion (Docket Entry No. 7) is granted.
Defendants Citibank TIAA and David Howerton’s pending motion (Docket
Entry No. 17) is granted.
Yoonesi’s motion for leave to file a late reply brief (Docket Entry No. 39) is
granted. The Clerk shall file the reply brief submitted at Docket Entry No. 41.
Yoonesi’s remaining pending motions (Docket Entry Nos. 6, 40, and 42) are
denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-56374
Mahmood Yoonessi v. Andre Khansari
Combined Opinion