Abbott v. United Venture Capital, Inc.

972 F.2d 1336 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. George W. ABBOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED VENTURE CAPITAL, INC., a Nevada Corporation; Inn Management, Inc., a Nevada Corporation; Seth L. Atwood; Robert J. Angres; Mark H. Gunderson, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-16085. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 29, 1992. * Decided Aug. 5, 1992. Before TANG, BEEZER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 George W. Abbott appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Abbott contends that the district court should have conducted a hearing before dismissing his case, and that its dismissal was an abuse of discretion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 3 We review a district court's dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute for abuse of discretion. West Coast Theater Corp. v. City of Portland, 897 F.2d 1519, 1523 (9th Cir.1990). "In…