Moshe Perelman v. Steven Jones

61 F.3d 912 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Moshe PERELMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steven JONES, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-17148. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 17, 1995. * Decided July 20, 1995. Before: FLETCHER, KOZINSKI and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Moshe Perelman appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 civil rights action seeking damages from his former wife and other defendants for violating his right to privacy and committing state law torts by entering his home and removing his belongings. Perelman contends the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the action when Perelman did not respond to a show cause order entered after he failed to appear for a court-ordered settlement conference. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , 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);…