lawsuit was pending in state court. The district court instead held a bench trial. At the end of the trial, the district court determined Gillis was not authorized to cancel his lease with A&P and that A&P had timely cured its initial default by paying to Gillis the required annual percentage rent. Gillis challenges that judgment in this appeal. In particular, Gillis maintains the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and erred in its findings of fact. The District Court’s Jurisdiction This Court reviews the district court’s decision to issue a declaratory judgment for an abuse of discretion. See Agora Syndicate v. Robinson Janitorial Specialists, 149 F.3d 371, 372 (5th Cir. 1998); Wilton v. Seven Falls Co., 515 U.S. 277, 289-290, 115 S.Ct. 2137, 132 L.Ed.2d 214 (1995) (<HOLDING>). A reviewing court finds an abuse of
holding that the imposition of sanctions is reviewed for abuse of discretion recognizing that a district courts dismissal of an independent action under rule 60b is reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that the dismissal of a frivolous action reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that district courts decisions about the propriety of hearing declaratory judgment actions  should be reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that a district courts decision on whether to hold a daubert hearing is reviewed only for abuse of discretion