Ron Johnson v. British Petroleum of America

MEMORANDUM

Ron Johnson appeals pro se from the district court’s orders dismissing his antitrust action against British Petroleum of America for failure to prosecute and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to prosecute. Ash v. Cvetkov, 739 F.2d 493, 495 (9th Cir.1984). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Johnson’s action for failure to prosecute after Johnson failed to act on the district court’s orders to take steps to perfect service on the defendant. See id. at 496-97 (discussing factors to guide the district court’s decision whether to dismiss for failure to prosecute).

Because we affirm the district court’s dismissal for failure to prosecute, we do not consider Johnson’s challenges to the district court’s interlocutory orders. See Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1386 (9th Cir.1996) (after dismissal for failure to prosecute, interlocutory orders are not ap-pealable regardless of whether the failure to prosecute was purposeful).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Johnson’s motion for reconsideration…