Kulick v. United States Supreme Court

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT R. J. KULICK, No. 23-3376 D.C. No. 2:23-cv-06474-GW-BFM Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEMORANDUM* UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT; UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA; DOES, 1-500, Inclusive, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 18, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and DESAI, Circuit Judges. R. J. Kulick appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). action alleging various federal claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to comply with a court order. Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Kulick’s action because Kulick failed to respond timely to the district court’s order to amend the complaint despite being warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. See id. at 640, 642-43 (discussing factors to consider in determining whether to dismiss for failure to comply with a court order and noting that dismissal should not be disturbed absent “a definite and firm conviction” that the district court “committed a clear error of judgment” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). We reject as unsupported by the record Kulick’s contentions that the district judge was biased against him. All pending motions and requests are denied. AFFIRMED. 2 23-3376