Case Name: Robert P. BENYAMINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAHOOTA; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-23
Citations: 517 F. App'x 563
Docket Number: No. 12-16863
Parties: Robert P. BENYAMINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAHOOTA; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 517
Pages: 563–563

Head Matter:
Robert P. BENYAMINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAHOOTA; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-16863.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 16, 2013.
Filed April 23, 2013.
Robert P. Benyamini, Walnut Creek, CA, pro se.
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, 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
Robert P. Benyamini, a former California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his medical needs and other constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the dismissal of an action for failure to comply with an order to file an amended complaint, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.1992), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action after providing Benyamini with an opportunity to amend his complaint, apprising him of the deficiencies of his pleading, and warning him that failure to amend would result in dismissal. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) (allowing dismissal of action for failure to comply with court orders); Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260-61 (listing factors to guide dismissal under Rule 41(b)).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.