Charles Davis v. D. Calvin, et al, No. 09-16655 (9th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 04 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CHARLES T. DAVIS, No. 09-16655 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01383-FCDEFB v. D. CALVIN, C/O; et al., MEMORANDUM * Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Frank C. Damrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 22, 2010 ** Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Charles T. Davis s ( Davis ) action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) after warning Davis to comply with its order to appear at his deposition and weighing the pertinent factors. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642-43 (9th Cir. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 2002) (discussing factors that courts must consider in determining whether to dismiss for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order). Because we affirm the district court s dismissal under Rule 41(b), we do not consider Davis s challenges to the district court s interlocutory orders. See Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1386 (9th Cir. 1996). AFFIRMED. 2 09-16655
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
