Abelfatah Ellawendy v. Csumb Police Department;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ABELFATAH ELLAWENDY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CSUMB POLICE DEPARTMENT; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-17376
D.C. No. 5:19-cv-08417-LHK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Lucy H. Koh, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
AbelFatah Ellawendy appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and
Fourteenth Amendments. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
review for an abuse of discretion a sua sponte dismissal for failure to prosecute.
* 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).
FILED
JUL 27 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-17376
Oliva v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 272, 274 (9th Cir. 1992). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Ellawendy’s
action for failure to prosecute after Ellawendy failed to file his fourth amended
complaint, despite being warned that failure to comply with the court’s orders may
result in dismissal. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640-43 (9th Cir.
2002) (discussing factors to be considered before dismissing a case for failure to
prosecute; a district court’s dismissal should not be disturbed absent “a definite and
firm conviction” that it “committed a clear error of judgment” (citations and
internal quotation marks omitted)).
We reject as unsupported by the record Ellawendy’s contention that the
district court failed to serve him with the magistrate judge’s third screening order
or report and recommendation.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --