Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-05858/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-05858-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
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

TVBI COMPANY LIMITED, et al., 

Plaintiffs,

v.

HONG THOA THI PHAM, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-5858 SI 

FINAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING 

ORDER

Re: Dkt. Nos. 107, 113, 114

On June 27, 2019, the Court held a final pretrial conference in the above captioned matter, 

which is set for jury trial beginning July 8, 2019. All parties were represented by counsel, with 

plaintiff’s counsel Robert D. Hunt appearing on the telephone. The following matters were 

resolved: 

1. Number of jurors and challenges: There will be a jury of 7 members. Each side 

shall have 4 peremptory challenges.

2. Voir dire: The Court will conduct general voir dire, including various of the 

questions requested by counsel in their proposed additional voir dire filings. Counsel for each side 

shall have up to 20 minutes total to question the panel. The parties are directed to meet and confer 

concerning a neutral, non-argumentative statement of the case which can be read to the jury panel 

at the beginning of the voir dire process; this statement shall be provided to the Court no later 

than Friday, July 5, 2019 at 3:00 p.m.

Case 3:17-cv-05858-SI Document 126 Filed 06/27/19 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

3. Jury instructions: The Court received proposed jury instructions from the parties. 

Since all substantive claims are predicated on California law, state CACI instruction forms have 

been used. The Court will instruct counsel on the instructions to be given prior to closing argument.

 

4. Trial exhibits: No later than Wednesday, July 3, 2019, the parties shall submit their 

trial exhibits, in binders with numbered tabs separating and identifying each exhibit and with an 

index. The Court shall be provided with three sets (the originals for the file, one set for the Court 

and one set for the witnesses). 

5. Timing of trial: Each side estimates that presentation of its case will take 2 days. 

Thus, based on a 4 day trial estimate, the Court sets the following time limits: each side shall have 

up to 30 minutes to present opening statements; each side shall have 7 hours total for presentation 

of evidence, which includes direct and cross-examination and presentation of all exhibits; and each 

side shall have up to 45 minutes for closing argument. 

6. Trial schedule: Jury selection will begin on July 8, 2019, at 8:30 a.m. The trial day 

runs from 8:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m., with a 15 minute break at 10:00 a.m., a 30 minute break at noon 

and a 15 minute break at 2:00 p.m., all times approximate. The Court does not hear trials on Fridays, 

although juries may continue to deliberate on Fridays.

7. Motions in limine: The parties filed 3 motions in limine. Docket Nos. 107, 113, 

114. After consideration of the arguments made in the briefs and at the pretrial conference, the 

Court rules as follows:

Plaintiffs’ motion #1, to exclude any argument by defendants that plaintiff must compensate 

Case 3:17-cv-05858-SI Document 126 Filed 06/27/19 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

defendants for any alleged losses: DENIED. Defendants’ answer includes affirmative defenses 

of off-set and unjust enrichment, which they may seek to prove. 

Plaintiffs’ motion #2, to exclude evidence not produced by March of 2019: GRANTED.

Defendant’s motion #1, to exclude evidence of Ms. Pham’s sale of commercial real estate: 

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Evidence of the sale will not be allowed, except in the 

following three situations: (1) If defendant Pham introduces any evidence that she used income or 

the sale proceeds from the San Jose Office Building to fund the Lido Nightclub; (2) If defendant 

Pham introduces any evidence that she is or was financially poor; and (3) If the issue of punitive 

damages goes to the jury. 

8. Other Matters: Punitive damages will not be bifurcated. Summary judgment was 

granted only as to Causes of Action 2 and 5. Thus plaintiffs must prove up all elements of the other 

causes of action asserted, although they may rely on findings of fact made in the order granting 

partial summary judgment. The Court will read the requested findings at an appropriate time after 

trial begins. 

At the Pre-Trial Conference, plaintiff voluntarily agreed to dismiss the first (derivative 

breach of fiduciary duty), third (derivative conversion and embezzlement), sixth (derivative 

fraudulent transfer) and seventh (direct fraudulent transfer) causes of action. Thus the only claims 

remaining for trial are the second (breach of fiduciary duty), fourth (direct conversion and 

embezzlement) and fifth (breach of contract) causes of action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2019

______________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:17-cv-05858-SI Document 126 Filed 06/27/19 Page 3 of 3