Case Name: Charles McMANUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dora B. SCHRIRO; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-25
Citations: 296 F. App'x 546
Docket Number: No. 07-15472
Parties: Charles McMANUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dora B. SCHRIRO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 296
Pages: 546–546

Head Matter:
Charles McMANUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dora B. SCHRIRO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-15472.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.
Filed Sept. 25, 2008.
Charles McManus, Florence, AZ, pro se.
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Charles McManus, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 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 by dismissing the action because McManus failed to file an amended complaint after the district court directed him to do so, advised him that no further extensions would be granted, and warned him that noncompliance would result in dismissal. See id. at 642-43 (concluding that district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing petitioner's action for failure to comply with order to file an amended petition).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.