United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

“ DISMISSAL OF THE CASES UNDER RULE 37
The heart of the appeal is the court's order dismissing the appellants' actions for failure to respond to appellees' discovery requests. Under Rule 37 (b) (2) (C) , if a party fails to obey an order to provide discovery, the court may dismiss the action, "rendering a judgment by default against the disobedient party." Fed.R.Civ.P. 37 (b) (2) (C) . "We review sanctions imposed by a district court for abuse of discretion and will not reverse absent a definite and firm conviction that the district court made a clear error of judgment." Halaco Engineering Co. ”

“ Appellants argue that the discovery was unduly burdensome, but there is no record (and no claim) that they ever sought relief from any of the discovery requests.
A district court must consider five factors in determining whether the circumstances warrant dismissal:
(1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. ”

“ Meanwhile, appellees served damage interrogatories called for by the discovery plan. In 1992, when the defendants had received no responses and none appeared forthcoming, defendants filed motions to dismiss, which the master converted into motions to compel, ordering appellants to respond to both sets of interrogatories. Appellants were warned repeatedly by both the court and the master that failure to comply would result in dismissal. ”