Kenneth A. Sierra v. WOODFORD, Director of Corrections;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KENNETH A. SIERRA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WOODFORD, Director of Corrections; et
al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-17049
D.C. No. 1:07-cv-00149-LJO-GSA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 15, 2013**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Kenneth A. Sierra appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute
and to obey a court order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
FILED
JAN 16 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-17049 2
review for an abuse of discretion. Ash v. Cvetkov, 739 F.2d 493, 495 (9th Cir.
1984). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action
because Sierra failed to submit a filing fee after being warned that failure to do so
would result in dismissal. See id. at 496-97 (listing factors to consider before
dismissing an action for lack of prosecution and explaining that “the district court
is in a much better position than we are to determine what period of delay can be
endured before its docket becomes unmanageable”).
We do not consider Sierra’s contentions concerning the district court’s order
denying his application to proceed in forma pauperis. See id. at 497-98
(interlocutory orders are not appealable after dismissal without prejudice for failure
to prosecute).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --