Shikeb Saddozai v. J. Ceballos; Kent Clark; Director of C.d.c.r.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHIKEB SADDOZAI,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
J. CEBALLOS; KENT CLARK;
DIRECTOR OF C.D.C.R.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-15376
D.C. No. 1:20-cv-00358-NONE-JLT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2022**
Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Shikeb Saddozai appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C § 1983 action concerning the inmate
grievance process. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for
an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with court orders.
* 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
FEB 22 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-15376
Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Saddozai’s action
because Saddozai failed to file an amended complaint after being granted several
extensions and being warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal. See id.
at 642-43 (factors to be considered in determining whether to dismiss an action for
failure to comply with court orders).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Saddozai’s motion for appointment of counsel (Docket Entry No. 5) is
denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --