Shikeb Saddozai v. K. Hosey

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 19 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SHIKEB SADDOZAI, No. 21-16591 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:19-cv-01611-DAD-HBK v. K. HOSEY, Appeals Coordinator at CCI; M. MEMORANDUM* BOUTTE, Appeals Coordinator at CCI, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 12, 2023** Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Shikeb Saddozai 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 * 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). F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Saddozai’s action because Saddozai failed to file a second amended complaint despite the district court granting several extensions of time and allowing Saddozai over one year to do so. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (a district court may dismiss an action “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order”); Pagtalunan, 291 F.3d at 642-43 (discussing factors that courts must consider in determining whether to dismiss for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order). Saddozai’s motion for appointment of counsel (Docket Entry No. 3) is denied. Saddozai’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 4) is denied as unnecessary. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). AFFIRMED. 2 21-16591