Young v. Department of Justice

Full title: Jan YOUNG; Everett C. Young, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 29, 2002

41 F. App'x 988 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

41 Fed.Appx. 988 (9th Cir. 2002) Jan YOUNG; Everett C. Young, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant-Appellee. No. 01-15416. D.C. No. CV-99-00578-GEE. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. July 29, 2002

Submitted July 22, 2002 ^*.

* 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION.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 District of Arizona Glenda E. Edmonds, Magistrate Judge, Presiding.

Before BROWNING, KOZINSKI, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Jan and Everett C. Young appeal pro se the district court's judgment dismissing their action alleging that defendant improperly tried to collect on Jan's Stafford student loans and caused the Youngs' files at the Supreme Court to disappear. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion the district court's dismissal for failure to amend and to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8, McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the Youngs' action because the Youngs failed to amend their prolix, defective complaint despite receiving three extensions of time. See id. Accordingly, the district court properly denied the Youngs' summary judgment motion as moot.

The Youngs' contention that the district court should not have transferred their case from one magistrate judge to another lacks merit. See Az. D. Ct. Local R. 2.10(d).

The Youngs' motion to expedite this appeal is denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.