Opinion ID: 2772758
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Evidentiary Issues and I-Flow’s Costs

Text: Because we conclude a new trial is warranted, we need not reach the challenged evidentiary rulings, see Transue v. Aesthetech Corp., 341 F.3d 911, 912–13 (9th Cir. 2003), leaving any future reconsideration of those rulings to the district court. The district court’s denial of I-Flow’s costs is moot and we dismiss the cross-appeal. See, e.g., Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth, 515 F.3d 883, 917 (9th Cir. 2008); Friedman & Friedman, Ltd. v. Tim McCandless, Inc., 606 F.3d 494, 503 (8th Cir. 2010).