Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-01-08903-SVW.
Steven Kalski, pro se, Palmdale, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Ira L. Gottlieb, Esq., Burbank, CA, Larry D. Stratton, Esq., Law Offices of Hausman and Soda, Encino, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Page 664.
Before: KOZINSKI, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Steven Kalski appeals pro se the district court's judgment dismissing his action with prejudice for failure to amend his complaint in compliance with the court's prior order directing amendment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See Nat'l Distribution Agency v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 117 F.3d 432, 433 (9th Cir.1997). We review for an abuse of discretion, McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.
Kalski failed to provide a short and plain statement of his claims even after detailed instruction from the district court. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Kalski's amended complaint with prejudice. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178-80 (9th Cir.1996).
AFFIRMED.