NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 20 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANTHONY X. SMITH, No. 20-17474

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:19-cv-02454-TLN-DB v.

MEMORANDUM* PAROLE BOARD, at High Desert State Prison; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 12, 2021** Before: TALLMAN, RAWLINSON, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Anthony X. Smith appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to comply with a court order his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258,

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Smith’s action because Smith failed to comply with the district court’s order to file a second amended complaint despite a warning that failure to do so would result in dismissal. See id. at 1260-63 (setting forth factors for determining whether a pro se action should be dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 41(b) and requiring “a definite and firm conviction” that the district court “committed a clear error of judgment” in order to overturn such a dismissal (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

Smith’s motion to certify questions to the Supreme Court (Docket Entry No. 5) is denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 20-17474