United States v. 2020-03-06 | 18-16701 | DOUGLAS YOKOIS V. CHARLES RYAN | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DOUGLAS D. YOKOIS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CHARLES L. RYAN, Director of Arizona
Department of Corrections, and individually;
et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-16701

D.C. No. 2:16-cv-03983-DGC-
MHB

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 3, 2020
**

Before: MURGUIA, CHRISTEN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Douglas D. Yokois appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to comply with
a court order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an

*
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

MAR 6 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 18-16701
abuse of discretion. Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002). We
affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Yokois’s action
after Yokois failed to comply with the district court’s order directing him to file a
third amended complaint and warning him that failure to comply would result in
dismissal. See id. at 642 (discussing factors to be considered before dismissing an
action for failure to comply with a court order).
We reject as meritless Yokois’s contentions that the district court acted
improperly by failing to appoint counsel sua sponte or excuse him from complying
with the local pleading rules.
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.