Yepez

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Yepez appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint for failure to *702 prosecute and failure to file an amended complaint. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we AFFIRM.

DISCUSSION

As the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we will .only repeat them here as necessary to explain our decision. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s dismissal of a complaint for failure to prosecute and failure to obey court orders. See, e.g., Oliva v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 272, 274 (9th Cir.1992); Yourish v. California Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983 , 986 & 989 (9th Cir.1999).

Yepez’s primary argument, that the district court’s order to file an amended complaint violated the parties’ stipulation, is without merit. Our previous order accepting the stipulation specifically stated that the district court could require an amended complaint, and the district judge was therefore well within his discretion in ordering Yepez to file one. We therefore deny Yepez’s Motion to Strike Allegations Contrary to the Stipulation.

Dismissal was also fully appropriate given Yepez’s repeated refusal to file an amended complaint, his demand that…