David WATTLETON, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION, et al., Defendants, Appellees, 223 F. App'x 9

PER CURIAM. After carefully considering the briefs and record on appeal, we affirm the judgment below. District courts are empowered to dismiss suits when plaintiffs defy court orders. Angulo-Alvarez v. Aponte de la Torre, 170 F.3d 246 (1st Cir.1999); HMG Prop. Investors, Inc. v. Parque Indus. Rio Canas, Inc., 847 F.2d 908 (1st Cir.1988). The appellant makes no showing that the court abused its discretion in dismissing his action. The appellant’s argument that civilly committed inmates are not prisoners for certain purposes is beside the point.

Moreover, the appellant fails adequately to address the district court’s reasoning that § 1915(a)(1) has been held to require everyone seeking in forma pauperis status to disclose their assets. Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27.0(c).