Luis Osollo v. Linda Darling-Hammond

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 26 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUIS OSOLLO, No. 18-56018
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No.
2:16-cv-03045-SJO-SHK
v.
LINDA DARLING-HAMMOND; et al., MEMORANDUM*
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 24, 2020**
Before: FARRIS, TROTT, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Luis Osollo appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights
action arising from Los Angeles Unified School District’s (“LAUSD”) termination
of his employment as substitute high school teacher and subsequent proceedings to
suspend his California teacher’s credential. The district court dismissed the action
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and alternatively for failure to
state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). We review the district court’s decision
whether to dismiss pursuant to Rule 41(b) for an abuse of discretion. Tillman v.
Tillman, 825 F.3d 1069, 1074 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm the district court’s
judgment.
In light of Osollo’s repeated failure to comply with the district court’s orders
to file a complaint that included a short and plain statement of claims, as required
by Rule 8(a), despite the fact that he is an attorney, the district court properly
exercised its discretion in dismissing the action with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b) (providing for dismissal when a plaintiff fails to comply with the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure or court orders); Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639,
642 (9th Cir. 2002) (setting forth factors to be weighed).
AFFIRMED.
2