Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03396/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03396-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NOHEMI LAZCANO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JOHN E. POTTER, IN HIS OFFICIAL

CAPACITY AS POSTMASTER GENERAL,

Defendant. /

No. C 05-03396 WHA

FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER

FOR GOOD CAUSE and after a final pretrial conference, the Court issues the

following final pretrial order: 

1. This case shall go to a JURY TRIAL on JANUARY 29, 2007, at 7:30 A.M., and shall

continue until completed on the schedule discussed at the conference. The issues to be tried

shall be those set forth in the joint proposed pretrial order except to the extent modified by order

in limine. This final pretrial order supersedes all the complaint, answer and any counterclaims,

cross-claims or third-party complaints, i.e., only the issues expressly identified for trial remain

in the case. 

2. Rulings on the motions in limine shall be summarized jointly by counsel and

submitted by FRIDAY, JANUARY 26, 2007. 

3. Except for good cause, each party is limited to the witnesses and exhibits

disclosed in the joint proposed final pretrial order less any excluded or limited by an order

Case 3:05-cv-03396-WHA Document 110 Filed 01/22/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

in limine. Materials or witnesses used solely for impeachment need not be disclosed and may

be used, subject to the rules of evidence. 

4. The stipulations of facts set forth in the joint proposed final pretrial order are

approved and binding on all parties. 

5. A jury of EIGHT PERSONS shall be used. 

6. Each side shall have TEN HOURS to examine witnesses (counting direct

examination, cross-examination, re-direct examination, re-cross examination, etc.). 

Opening statements and closing arguments shall not count against the limit. In setting this

limit, the Court has carefully considered the witness summaries provided for the final pretrial

conference. Counsel had been directed to specify for each witness all non-cumulative

testimony. Conclusory and repetitive proffers were made instead. Counsel wholly failed to

justify the lengthy time estimates requested. The Court nonetheless did the best it could with

the information given. It also drew on its experience in presiding over cases of similar

complexity and the Court’s earlier 25 years in trial practice as a lawyer. Finally, the Court took

into account the competing demands on the Court’s calendar and the need to reduce the burden

on the members of the jury who will decide the case. The limits are subject to enlargement but

only on the “safety-valve” terms explained at the final pretrial conference. 

7. The parties shall follow the Court's current Guidelines for Trial and

Final Pretrial Conference, separately provided and available on the Internet at

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov, which guidelines are incorporated as part of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 22, 2007. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-03396-WHA Document 110 Filed 01/22/07 Page 2 of 2