Doyle Dean Hartline v. National University

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DOYLE DEAN HARTLINE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 18-16725
D.C. No. 2:14-cv-00635-KJM-AC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Doyle Dean Hartline appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims. We review for an
abuse of discretion a district court’s dismissal as a sanction under Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 37(b). Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
MAR 20 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
(9th Cir. 1987). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Hartline’s action
because Hartline failed to produce documents in compliance with the district
court’s discovery order despite receiving multiple extensions of time to respond to
discovery requests and being warned that noncompliance could result in dismissal.
See id. at 130-32 (setting forth factors to be considered before dismissing under
Rule 37(b)).
AFFIRMED1.
1 In making this decision, we reviewed Docket Entry Nos. 9 and 10.

-- 2 of 2 --