SHANNON v. IKEGBU (2021)

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Mychael Tyrone Shannon appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court's dismissal for failure to comply

with a court order. Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Shannon's action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) because Shannon failed to advise the district court as to whether he was electing to proceed with his cognizable claims or file an amended complaint, despite being warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal. See id. at 640, 642-43 (discussing factors to consider in determining whether to dismiss under Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with a court order; this court may review the record independently to determine if the district court abused its discretion).

We do not consider allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.