Carmen E. Campbell v. Jules M. Perley

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
CARMEN E. CAMPBELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JULES M. PERLEY,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 11-56558
D.C. No. 2:09-cv-09182-RGK-
MAN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Carmen E. Campbell appeals pro se from the district court’s order
dismissing her medical malpractice action for failure to prosecute. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion,
FILED
JUL 13 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-56558 2
Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1384 (9th Cir. 1996), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Campbell’s
action because it had been pending for more than a year and Campbell failed to file
an adequate response to the court’s order to show cause why it should not be
dismissed for lack of prosecution. See id. at 1384-85 (discussing factors to guide
the court’s decision and affirming dismissal for failure to prosecute).
Campbell’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --