Dayon Lively v. James Gomez Nadim Kouhry, M.D. George Ingle Sue Hubbard

56 F.3d 72 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Dayon LIVELY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James GOMEZ; Nadim Kouhry, M.D.; George Ingle; Sue Hubbard, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15142. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 16, 1995. * Decided May 18, 1995. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 California state prisoner Dayon Lively appeals pro se the district court's dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action for failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We review for abuse of discretion, Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1136 (9th Cir. 1987), and affirm. 3 A district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 321 (1992). Dismissal, however, is a severe penalty and should be imposed…