242 F.3d 381 (9th Cir. 2000)
Mary Cherry COOK; Aaron Cook; Phillip Cook; Matthew Cook; Christopher Cook; Christie Cook, Plaintiffs,
Randal K. COOK, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Steven Wayne MATHIAS; David Divelbiss; Elerick; Ann Rhodehammel; Steve Magarian, Fresno County Sheriff; Fresno County; Fresno County Sheriffs Department; Fresno County Social Services Department; Fresno County Board of Supervisors, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 00-15153.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
October 27, 2000
Submitted October 16, 2000.
Because the panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument, Cook's motion for oral argument is denied. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
D.C. No. CV-98-05477-REC/DLB
Editorial Note:
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Robert E. Coyle, Chief Judge, Presiding.
Before PREGERSON, KLEINFELD, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Randal K. Cook appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of Cook's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court's dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), see Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.1992), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Cook's action because despite warnings, Cook repeatedly failed to comply with the district court's orders and local rules. See id. at 1260-61.
Cook's remaining contentions lack merit.
AFFIRMED.