Perry Johnson v. Selene Finance, Lp;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PERRY JOHNSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SELENE FINANCE, LP; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-55051
D.C. No. 8:16-cv-01085-AG-KES
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Perry Johnson appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his action
alleging federal and state law claims arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a
dismissal for failing to comply with court orders, In re Phenylpropanolamine
* 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).
FILED
MAR 19 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-55051
(PPA) Prods. Liab. Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Johnson’s action
because Johnson failed to comply with the district court’s scheduling orders and
the relevant factors favored dismissal. See id. at 1226-29 (discussing the five
factors a district court must weigh in deciding whether to dismiss a case for failure
to comply with a court order); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th
Cir. 1992) (although preferred, the district court is not required to make explicit
findings; this court may review the record independently to determine if the district
court has abused its discretion).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --