
    A.R.J.; et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 03-16402.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 23, 2005.
    
    Decided April 4, 2005.
    J. Ryan, Sunnyvale, CA, pro se.
    A.R.J., Sunnyvale, CA, pro se.
    Before: B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

A.R.J. appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice her action against the United States, the state of California, and others for failure to comply with a court order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.1992), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing A.R.J.’s action without prejudice for failure to file a timely amended complaint as ordered by the court. See id. at 1260-62. The district court granted numerous extensions of time to file an amended complaint, warned A.R.J. that failure to file would result in dismissal, and dismissed the action without prejudice to A.R.J re-filing a complaint when she is ready to proceed.

A.R.J.’s remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     