addiction over the past four years, not to mention their later unreliable testimony at the evidentiary hearing attempting to explain those lies, make it impossible for the Court now to believe a word they say about the cause of the fire. Dismissal is really the only meaningful sanction available to the Court at this late juncture. D. Relationship Between Misconduct and Matters in Controversy “The most critical criterion for the imposition of a dismissal sanction is that the misconduct penalized must relate to matters in controversy in such a way as to interfere with the rightful decision of the case.” Halaco, 843 F.2d at 381. A plaintiffs drug use is highly probative of product misuse and proximate cause. See, e.g., Bocanegra v. Vicmar Services, Inc., 320 F.3d 581, 587 (5th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Gen. Motors Corp. v. Walden, 406 F.2d 606,
holding that a plan administrators decision to deny benefits was arbitrary and capricious even though an attending physician had submitted a form stating the plaintiff could sit for six hours stand for two hours and walk for two hours holding that because marijuana has a distinct smell the odor of marijuana alone can satisfy the probable cause requirement to search a vehicle or baggage holding a motor vehicle can be a deadly weapon by the manner of its use holding that evidence of a plaintiffs marijuana use eight hours prior to a motor vehicle fire was relevant where an expert testified that marijuana use can affect cognitive functions for up to 12 hours after the acute high has worn off holding that delay of several hours after the vehicle was seized was reasonable