16.1 or otherwise argued that he attempted to advance his case against the remaining defendant, we conclude that the district court was within its discretion when it dismissed the remaining defendant based on appellant's failure to hold the NRCP 16.1 case conference. See Arnold v. Kip, 123 Nev. 410, 414, 168 P.3d 1050, 1052 (2007) (reviewing a district court's decision to grant a motion to dismiss under NRCP 16.1(e) for an abuse of discretion); see also NRCP 16.1(g) (specifying that pro se plaintiffs are not excused from holding a case conference). We therefore ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

J.

, J.

Gibbons

J.

Pickering

cc: Hon. Michael Montero, District Judge James Anthony Davis Attorney General/Carson City Pershing County Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A