Case ID: f-appx_688/html/0436-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Vincent U. SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M. CARRASCO; M. Dailo, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 16-15436
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 11, 2017 
    
    Filed April 19, 2017
    
      Vincent U. Solomon, Pro Se
    Neah Huynh, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees
    Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Vincent U. Solomon appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to comply with court orders his 42 U.S. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Solomon’s action after Solomon failed to comply with court orders or meet deadlines, despite being warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. See id. at 642-43 (setting forth the factors to consider before dismissing for failure to comply with a court order).

We reject as unsupported by the record Solomon’s contention that the district court judge was biased.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.