Jeane Gregory v. Gust Rosenfeld Plc

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JEANE GREGORY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GUST ROSENFELD PLC; MARICOPA
COUNTY ATTORNEY; SUPERIOR
COURT OF ARIZONA, Maricopa County;
ARIZONA STATE BAR,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-16853
D.C. No. 2:21-cv-00877-GMS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 15, 2022**
Before: SILVERMAN, WATFORD, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.
Jeane Gregory appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
for failure to comply with a court order her diversity action alleging claims arising
out of a probate proceeding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
* 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
JUN 28 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-16853
review for an abuse of discretion. Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th
Cir. 2002). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Gregory’s action
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) after Gregory failed to file an
amended complaint as ordered, despite being warned that failure to do so would
result in dismissal. See id. at 641-43 (discussing factors to consider in determining
whether to dismiss for failure to comply with a court order; this court may review
the record independently to determine if the district court abused its discretion).
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).
Gregory’s motions for entry of default (Docket Entry Nos. 11, 12, 13, 14,
and 16) are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --