Case ID: f-appx_584/html/0422-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mario LEANOS; Olga Leanos, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK FA, Defendant, and JPMorgan Chase Bank NA; California Reconveyance Company, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 12-56383.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 22, 2014.
    
    Filed Aug. 1, 2014.
    Mario Léanos, Pomona, CA, pro se.
    
      Olga Léanos, Pomona, CA, pro se.
    David Doss Piper, Esquire, Melissa Marie Smith, Keesal, Young & Logan, Long Beach, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. 
        See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Mario and Olga Leanos appeal pro se from the district court’s order dismissing their action against their mortgage lender and other private parties alleging constitutional violations and various federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with an order to amend the complaint. McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir.1996). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing plaintiffs’ action for failure to comply with the court’s order to file an amended complaint because plaintiffs failed to file an amended complaint, despite being afforded ample time to do so and being warned that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of their action. See id. at 1177-78; see also Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642-43 (9th Cir.2002) (discussing factors relevant to dismissal for failure to comply with a court order).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.