Hugo Villasenor v. City of Fairfield
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Hugo Villasenor appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of prosecution his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims related to police brutality during an arrest. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1384 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Villasenor’s action in light of the relevant factors, including the pendency of the action for over a year without meaningful prosecution, the risk of prejudice to the defendants from Villase-nor’s inability to respond to discovery or participate in the action after being deported to Mexico, and the court’s consideration of alternatives. See id. at 1384-85 (discussing five factors to guide decision and affirming dismissal for failure to prosecute because three factors outweighed the rest); see also Moneymaker v. CoBen (In re Eisen), 31 F.3d 1447, 1452 (9th Cir.1994) (“failure to prosecute diligently is sufficient by itself to justify a dismissal, even in the absence of a showing of actual prejudice to the defendant”).