Case Name: Carmen E. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jules M. PERLEY, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-13
Citations: 474 F. App'x 618
Docket Number: No. 11-56558
Parties: Carmen E. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Jules M. PERLEY, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 618–618

Head Matter:
Carmen E. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Jules M. PERLEY, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 11-56558.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 26, 2012.
Filed July 13, 2012.
Carmen E. Campbell, Valencia, CA, pro se.
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Carmen E. Campbell appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing her medical malpractice action for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1384 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Campbell's action because it had been pending for more than a year and Campbell failed to file an adequate response to the court's order to show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. See id. at 1384-85 (discussing factors to guide the court's decision and affirming dismissal for failure to prosecute).
Campbell's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.