Opinion
No. 06-16451.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed January 22, 2008.
William O. Dillingham, Esq., Eric B. Simon, Esq., Rodrigo E. Salas, Esq., Dillingham Murphy, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.
Clinton L. Watson, St. Louis, MO, pro missing pro se.
Mark Lee Watson, Esq., Blakely Sokoloff, Denver, CO, for Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Claudia Wilken, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-04-03079-CW.
Before: HALL, O'SCANNLAIN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Clinton L. Watson appeals pro se from the district court's default judgment entered against him in a diversity action filed by Anthony Reyes and others, alleging breach of a partnership agreement and other claims under California law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion, Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471 (9th Cir. 1986), and we affirm.
To the extent Watson contends the district court abused its discretion by entering a default judgment, the contention fails because the district court warned Watson in six separate orders that his continued failure to obey court orders and comply with discovery rules could, and would result in sanctions, including entry of default against him. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2). Further, the record belies Watson's contention that the district court's money award is not supported by the evidence.
To the extent Watson challenges the factual findings, we do not consider those challenges because Watson failed to provide the court with the transcript. See Syneom Capital Corp. v. Wade, 924 F.2d 167, 169 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam) (disse appellant's appeal for failure to provide transcript).
The remaining contentions are unavailing.
Appellee's request for sanctions is denied without prejudice to filing a separate motion. See Fed.R.App.P. 38.