Vincent U. Solomon v. M. Carrasco; M. Dailo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VINCENT U. SOLOMON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
M. CARRASCO; M. DAILO,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-15436
D.C. No. 1:11-cv-01511-LJO-SKO
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2017**
Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Vincent U. Solomon appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing for failure to comply with court orders his 42 U.S.
§ 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. 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).
FILED
APR 19 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-15436
F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Solomon’s action
after Solomon failed to comply with court orders or meet deadlines, despite being
warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. See id. at 642-43 (setting
forth the factors to consider before dismissing for failure to comply with a court
order).
We reject as unsupported by the record Solomon’s contention that the
district court judge was biased.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --