Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01603/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01603-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HUSBANDS FOR RENT, INC.,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

HANDY HUSBANDS FOR RENT,

INC.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C04-1603 BZ

PRETRIAL ORDER

The pretrial conference in this case was held on Tuesday,

January 31, 2006. Plaintiff was represented by Michael

McClelland, Esq., and defendant was represented by Jean Ann

Bauer, Esq. 

This order shall control the subsequent conduct of the

case and be modified only to prevent manifest injustice. See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e). 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Trial shall begin on February 13, 2006, at 8:30 a.m.

in Courtroom G, 15th Floor, Federal Building, 450 Golden Gate

Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102. On the first day,

the proceedings will last from 8:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m., with

Case 3:04-cv-01603-BZ Document 111 Filed 02/02/06 Page 1 of 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

2

the following day’s schedule to be determined. Each side

shall present witnesses on time and schedule witnesses to

avoid any interruption in the presentation of testimony. 

2. Plaintiff’s motions in limine to exclude testimony

or documents offered by defendant to contradict or vary

responses admitted in response to plaintiff’s request for

admissions, set one and set two were GRANTED on September 13,

2005. 

3. For the reasons below and for the reasons stated on

the record at the pretrial conference, the following are

rulings on plaintiff’s remaining motions in limine:

a. Plaintiff’s motion to exclude all documents or

testimony regarding plaintiff’s alleged failure to

produce documents requested by defendant is DENIED,

without prejudice to being renewed at trial in the

context of specific evidence.

b. Plaintiff’s motion to exclude all documents offered

by defendant that were not produced at defendant’s

deposition or pursuant to plaintiff’s request for

production of documents is DENIED, without prejudice to

being renewed at trial in the context of specific

documents.

c. Plaintiff’s motion to exclude all documents or

testimony obtained by defendant at the early neutral

evaluation is GRANTED.

d. Plaintiff’s motion to exclude all witnesses not

disclosed by defendant in Rule 33 interrogatory

responses or Rule 26 disclosures is DENIED as moot. 

Case 3:04-cv-01603-BZ Document 111 Filed 02/02/06 Page 2 of 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

3

e. Plaintiff’s motion to exclude any testimony by Betty

Boyd is DENIED as moot, as she will not be testifying. 

f. Plaintiff’s motion with respect to spoliation of

evidence is DENIED. 

4. Plaintiff’s objections to defendant’s exhibits are

OVERRULED. Defendant has represented that the only exhibits

it plans to use are attached to the answer to the complaint. 

Exhibits shall not be a part of the record unless sponsored

by a witness. 

Dated: February 1, 2006

 Bernard Zimmerman 

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\HUSBANDS\PT.ORD.wpd

Case 3:04-cv-01603-BZ Document 111 Filed 02/02/06 Page 3 of 3