Raymond Setzke v. Steve Whitmill

Raymond Setzke appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action after he failed to appear for two scheduled depositions. We see no abuse of discretion in the district court’s dismissal of the action. See Doe v. Cassel, 403 F.3d 986, 990 (8th Cir.2005) (per curiam) (Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) dismissal); Boogaerts v. Bank of Bradley, 961 F.2d 765, 768 (8th Cir.1992) (per curiam) (Fed.R.Civ.P. 37 dismissal). Setzke admitted to defense counsel by telephone that he received notice of the first deposition, the court warned him that failure to attend the second…