ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

Defendant San Joaquin County's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law ("JMOL") is reflected on the court's docket as unresolved. (ECF 123.) As explained below, the court affirms its oral denial of the motion.

Plaintiff Janis Trulsson filed this employment discrimination case on November 9, 2011. (ECF 1.) Through various pre-trial motions and rulings, the action was eventually narrowed so that the case proceeded to trial on the following claims only: (1) gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; (2) gender discrimination in violation of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"); (3) retaliation in violation of the FEHA; and (4) failure to prevent retaliation and discrimination in violation of the FEHA.

The jury trial commenced on March 10, 2014. (ECF 109.) At the conclusion of the evidence, defendant's counsel made an oral JMOL motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a); plaintiff's counsel argued in opposition, and defendant's counsel argued in reply. (See ECF 119.) The court denied defendant's JMOL motion at that time orally. Concurrent with its making the oral motion, defendant filed the written motion still showing as pending, raising the same arguments as made in court.

So that the record is clear, the court's previous denial of defendant's JMOL motion extends to denial of the written motion as well.

IT IS SO ORDERED.