Hill

MEMORANDUM **

Lorrilla Hill appeals the district court’s dismissal of her action against Bayer Corporation with prejudice for failure to comply with discovery obligations under Case Management Orders (CMO) 6 and 6A. We vacate the dismissal and remand for further proceedings.

The district court exercised its discretion to impose the sanction of dismissal based solely on a finding that Hill had “not submitted fact sheets to date.” However, the record shows that the PPA manufacturers received Hill’s fact sheet no later than December 1, 2003, nearly six months prior to the district court’s dismissal order. We thus conclude that the finding that was the basis for dismissal was clearly erroneous.

A district court’s determination to dismiss a case for failure to comply with a court order is guided by the Malone factors. See Malone v. U.S. Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir.1987) (setting forth five factors). Though we may review the record independently to decide whether the district court abused its discretion, see Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992) (as amended), here the district court did not exercise its discretion based on Hill’s service of a fact sheet…