opportunity; Failing to pursue its claims and seek meaningful discovery; Trying to thwart nearly all depositions of its officials; Repeatedly obstructing documentary discovery ....; Trying to avoid dismissal on the merits by amending its complaint and leaving only an unripe — but equally bad — • claim; Suing here first and then instigating, paying for and supervising — and hiding its role in — a second proceeding ...; Trying to hide its illegal arrangement; and Engaging in an open war of attrition.” Id. at 1111-12. 122 . Id. at 1119. 123 . Chambers, 501 U.S. at 54, 111 S.Ct. 2123. 124 . Boland Marine & Mfg. Co. v. Rihner, 41 F.3d 997, 1005 (5th Cir.1995) (quoting Chambers, 501 U.S. at 46, 111 S.Ct. 2123). 125 . NASCO, Inc. v. Calcasieu Tel. & Radio, 894 F.2d 696, 703-04 (5th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). 126 . Chambers, 501 U.S. at 58, 111 S.Ct.
holding that trial courts have the power to sanction parties for bad faith abuse of the judicial process not covered by rule or statute holding that a finding of plaintiffs bad faith is not a prerequisite to the trial courts exercise of discretion to award fees holding that the rules of civil procedure did not displace a district courts power to shift fees for bad faith wanton and vexatious conduct in the prosecution of the case recognizing that federal courts have inherent authority to control and redress bad faith and unreasonable vexatious or wanton conduct in litigation that leads to delay prolonging or disruption of court proceedings via imposition of sanctions including award of attorney fees holding that although courts have inherent power to dismiss bad faith litigant  707a does not provide basis for dismissal on grounds of bad faith filing