Kalski v. California Ass'n of Professional Employees
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Steven Kalski appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his action with prejudice for failure to amend his complaint in compliance with the court’s prior order directing amendment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See Nat’l Distribution Agency v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 117 F.3d 432, 433 (9th Cir.1997). We review for an abuse of discretion, McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.
Kalski failed to provide a short and plain statement of his claims even after detailed instruction from the district court. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Kalski’s amended complaint with prejudice. Fed. R.Civ.P. 41(b). See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178-80 (9th Cir.1996).
AFFIRMED.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
81 F. App'x 663 (Kalski v. California Ass'n of Professional Employees) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.