Hoang Tran v. William Gore

MEMORANDUM

Former California state prisoner Hoang Minh Tran appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force and deliberate indifference. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion the dismissal for failure to comply with a court order. Allen v. Calderon, 408 F.3d 1150, 1152 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Tran’s action because, despite the court’s warnings, Tran failed to comply with the order to either respond to defendants’ discovery requests or seek dismissal. See Computer Task Group, Inc. v. Brotby, 364 F.3d 1112, 1115 (9th Cir.2004) (per curiam) (discussing five factors for determining whether to dismiss for failure to comply with a court order).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Tran’s motions for appointment of counsel because Tran failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. See Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101 , 1103 (9th Cir.2004) (standard of review and requirements for appointment of counsel).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Tran’s…