CEDRIC GREENE, Jr. v. B. Sanders;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28**
U.S.C. § 636(c).
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
CEDRIC GREENE, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
B. SANDERS; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-16450
D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00336-MJS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Michael J. Seng, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
Submitted December 19, 2012***
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Former California state prisoner Cedric Greene, Jr., appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment following a jury trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
FILED
JAN 03 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-16450 2
alleging violations of his Eighth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a ruling on a motion to
continue, Danjaq LLC v. Sony Corp., 263 F.3d 942, 961 (9th Cir. 2001), and we
affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Greene’s motion for
a continuance because Greene had not demonstrated diligence in his efforts to
prepare his defense prior to the date set for trial, a continuance on the day of trial
would have seriously inconvenienced the court and defendants, and Greene has
failed to establish that he was prejudiced by the denial. See United States v. Flynt,
756 F.2d 1352, 1359 (9th Cir. 1985).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --