22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T475,MEMORANDUM William M. Bryson, Jr,, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his Freedom of Information Act action without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.1992), and we affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Bryson’s action after Bryson failed to respond to an order to show cause regarding missing service documents, despite being warned that failure to comply with the order to show cause would result in dismissal of his action. See id. at 1260-61 (setting forth factors to consider before dismissing an action for failure to comply with a court order). We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983 , 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided .by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T4a7,

MEMORANDUM

William M. Bryson, Jr,, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his Freedom of Information Act action without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.1992), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Bryson’s action after Bryson failed to respond to an order to show cause regarding missing service documents, despite being warned that failure to comply with the order to show cause would result in dismissal of his action. See id. at 1260-61 (setting forth factors to consider before dismissing an action for failure to comply with a court order).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983 , 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided .by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.