McClure v. Glodo
McClure v. Glodo
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
John Patrick McClure appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Ash v. Cvetkov, 739 F.2d 493, 496 (9th Cir. 1984) (dismissal of an action without prejudice is appeal-able). We review for abuse of discretion, Ash, 739 F.2d at 495, and we affirm.
The district court may dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute. Id. at 496. Because the district court warned McClure that failure to comply with its orders could result in dismissal and gave
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appointment of counsel because Brown failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. See Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997).
AFFIRMED.
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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.