From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Herrera v. Nguyen

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Jul 1, 2015
609 F. App'x 422 (9th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 14-16371

07-01-2015

ROBERTO HERRERA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HUU NGUYEN; et al., Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 1:12-cv-01565-SKO MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Sheila K. Oberto, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

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

Herrera consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

California state prisoner Roberto Herrera appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs and retaliation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court's dismissal for failure to comply with a court order, Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Herrera's action without prejudice after Herrera failed to file a legible amended pleading in compliance with the local rules, despite being warned that failure to do so could result in dismissal. See E.D. Cal. R. 130(b) (documents filed with the court must be presented legibly); Pagtalunan, 291 F.3d at 640, 642-43 (discussing the five factors for determining whether to dismiss a case for failure to comply with a court order and noting that dismissal should not be disturbed absent "a definite and firm conviction" that the district court "committed a clear error of judgment" (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

Because we affirm the district court's dismissal for failure to comply with a court order, we do not consider Herrera's challenge to the district court's order dismissing his first amended complaint. See Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1386 (9th Cir. 1996) (interlocutory orders cannot be appealed after a dismissal for failure to prosecute, even if the failure is negligent or due to a mistake).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Herrera v. Nguyen

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Jul 1, 2015
609 F. App'x 422 (9th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Herrera v. Nguyen

Case Details

Full title:ROBERTO HERRERA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HUU NGUYEN; et al., Defendants…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jul 1, 2015

Citations

609 F. App'x 422 (9th Cir. 2015)