Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-01511/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-01511-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty 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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Pasquale Venezia,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Bentley Motors, Inc.,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-1511-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Rule 104 Hearing (Dkt. 140). Defendant

requests a Rule 104 evidentiary hearing to address the admissibility of four exhibits.

The Court finds that Defendant has not shown its request is within the ambit of Rule 104,

which applies when the admissibility of evidence depends on a preliminary factual finding by

the judge. In this case, a Rule 104 hearing would be tantamount to a mini trial. The moving

papers do not provide a sufficient justification for a separate hearing. On the other hand, a plan

to facilitate the admission of evidence may be discussed at the final pretrial conference. See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c)(2), (e). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion for Rule 104 Hearing (Dkt.

140).

DATED this 4th day of November, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01511-SMM Document 142 Filed 11/04/08 Page 1 of 1