From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Villaseñor v. Clinton

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 23, 2013
517 F. App'x 545 (9th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 11-56719 D.C. No. 5:08-cv-00419-CAS-PJW

04-23-2013

MARGARITO VILLASEÑOR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CLINTON; et al., Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding

Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Margarito Villaseñor appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his hand injury. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion. Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002) (dismissal for failure to comply with court order and failure to prosecute); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam) (dismissal for failure to comply with local rules). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Villaseñor's action with prejudice after Villaseñor failed to take any action for more than one year. See Pagtalunan, 291 F.3d at 642-43 (discussing the five factors for determining whether to dismiss a claim for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order); Ghazali, 46 F.3d at 53 (explaining that a court must weigh the same five factors to determine whether dismissal for failure to follow a local rule was an abuse of discretion).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Villaseñor's motion for reconsideration because Villaseñor failed to establish grounds for such relief. See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993) (standard of review and grounds for reconsideration).

Villaseñor's request for an order directing his prison facility to provide him access to the law library, set forth in his reply brief, is denied.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Villaseñor v. Clinton

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 23, 2013
517 F. App'x 545 (9th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Villaseñor v. Clinton

Case Details

Full title:MARGARITO VILLASEÑOR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CLINTON; et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 23, 2013

Citations

517 F. App'x 545 (9th Cir. 2013)