Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-01801/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-01801-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 195
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAREN BERNSTEIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,

Defendant.

Case No.18-cv-01801-JSC 

ORDER FOLLOWING PRETRIAL 

CONFERENCE

Dkt. Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 76, 77, 78

This Order memorializes the matters discussed at the Final Pretrial Conference on August 

29, 2019.

1. Motions in Limine

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 1 is GRANTED. (Dkt. No. 67.) Plaintiff confirms that 

she only seeking penalties for a willful violation under Cal. Civ. Code § 1794(c).

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 2 is GRANTED. (Dkt. No. 68.) No non-designated 

expert may provide expert testimony at trial. 

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 3 is GRANTED. (Dkt. No. 69.) The evidence is cabined 

to the already filed exhibit list and witness lists.

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 4 is DENIED. (Dkt. No. 70.) Plaintiff’s objection to Mr. 

Paredes’s testimony goes to its weight, not its admissibility.

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 5 is DENIED. (Dkt. No. 71.) Defendant does not intend 

to call Ms. McDonald and the Court already ruled on the other issues raised in Plaintiff’s motion.

Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 1 is GRANTED in part. (Dkt. No. 76.) Defendant 

identifies Exhibit Nos. 113, 114, and 115 as within the scope of this motion. Evidence of postwarranty repair work is only admissible if it relates to the three defects identified by Plaintiff: the 

Case 3:18-cv-01801-JSC Document 90 Filed 08/30/19 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

seatbelt, the parking break, and the rough engine idle. By September 6, 2019, Plaintiff shall 

provide Defendant with a redacted version of these exhibits in the form that she proposes be 

provided to the jury.

Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 2 is DENIED without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 77) 

Defendant did not identify any service bulletins or repairs orders on the exhibit list as falling 

within this motion. 

Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 3 is GRANTED in part. (Dkt. No. 78.) Plaintiff may 

testify regarding her own experience with the vehicle, but may not provide expert testimony 

regarding the alleged defects. Plaintiff also may not testify as to the value of the vehicle unless 

counsel is able to make an offer of proof that she has a sufficient basis of knowledge for doing so. 

2. Exhibits

Exhibits 6, 7, and 19 are not admissible.

To the extent that Plaintiff seeks to introduce any service bulletins, they are only 

admissible to the extent that they deal with the three defects identified by Plaintiff. The parties 

shall meet and confer in advance to resolve any disputes regarding admissibility of these 

documents and raise any impasse with the Court outside the presence of the jury.

3. Jury Selection

Jury selection will begin at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, September 16, 2019 in Courtroom D. 

Each side will have 20 minutes for voir dire and each side will be allowed three peremptory 

challenges following the for cause challenges. The Court will seat eight jurors. 

4. Trial Schedule

Following jury selection, the Court will take a lunch break and then begin with opening 

statements. Each side will have 5 hours to present their evidence which excludes the 30 minutes 

for opening statements and one hour for closing arguments. The parties must identify their 

witnesses for the following day to opposing counsel by noon the preceding business day. 

Counsel should arrive by 8:15 at the latest every day to discuss any issues with the Court 

before the jury arrives. Trial will run from 8:30 to 3:00 Monday, September 16 through 

Wednesday, September 18, although we may go longer on the 18th depending on how quickly the 

Case 3:18-cv-01801-JSC Document 90 Filed 08/30/19 Page 2 of 3
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

trial is progressing. The Court will advise the jury that counsel hopes to get the case to them by 

September 21, although the trial may spill over to Monday, September 23, 2019. There will be no 

trial proceedings on September 19 and 20.

If the parties resolve this matter prior to trial, they shall immediately notify the Court and 

file a notice on the docket.

This Order disposes of Docket Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 76, 77, 78.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 30, 2019

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:18-cv-01801-JSC Document 90 Filed 08/30/19 Page 3 of 3