ORDER FOLLOWING PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

Dkt. Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 76, 77, 78

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY, Magistrate Judge.

This Order memorializes the matters discussed at the Final Pretrial Conference on August 29, 2019.

1. Motions in Limine

Plaintiff's Motion in Limine No. 1 is GRANTED. (Dkt. No. 67.) Plaintiff confirms that she only seeking penalties for a willful violation under Cal. Civ. Code § 1794(c).

Plaintiff's Motion in Limine No. 2 is GRANTED. (Dkt. No. 68.) No non-designated expert may provide expert testimony at trial.

Plaintiff's Motion in Limine No. 3 is GRANTED. (Dkt. No. 69.) The evidence is cabined to the already filed exhibit list and witness lists.

Plaintiff's Motion in Limine No. 4 is DENIED. (Dkt. No. 70.) Plaintiff's objection to Mr. Paredes's testimony goes to its weight, not its admissibility.

Plaintiff's Motion in Limine No. 5 is DENIED. (Dkt. No. 71.) Defendant does not intend to call Ms. McDonald and the Court already ruled on the other issues raised in Plaintiff's motion.

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 1 is GRANTED in part. (Dkt. No. 76.) Defendant identifies Exhibit Nos. 113, 114, and 115 as within the scope of this motion. Evidence of post-warranty repair work is only admissible if it relates to the three defects identified by Plaintiff: the seatbelt, the parking break, and the rough engine idle. By September 6, 2019, Plaintiff shall provide Defendant with a redacted version of these exhibits in the form that she proposes be provided to the jury.

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 2 is DENIED without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 77) Defendant did not identify any service bulletins or repairs orders on the exhibit list as falling within this motion.

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 3 is GRANTED in part. (Dkt. No. 78.) Plaintiff may testify regarding her own experience with the vehicle, but may not provide expert testimony regarding the alleged defects. Plaintiff also may not testify as to the value of the vehicle unless counsel is able to make an offer of proof that she has a sufficient basis of knowledge for doing so.

2. Exhibits

Exhibits 6, 7, and 19 are not admissible.

To the extent that Plaintiff seeks to introduce any service bulletins, they are only admissible to the extent that they deal with the three defects identified by Plaintiff. The parties shall meet and confer in advance to resolve any disputes regarding admissibility of these documents and raise any impasse with the Court outside the presence of the jury.

3. Jury Selection

Jury selection will begin at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, September 16, 2019 in Courtroom D. Each side will have 20 minutes for voir dire and each side will be allowed three peremptory challenges following the for cause challenges. The Court will seat eight jurors.

4. Trial Schedule

Following jury selection, the Court will take a lunch break and then begin with opening statements. Each side will have 5 hours to present their evidence which excludes the 30 minutes for opening statements and one hour for closing arguments. The parties must identify their witnesses for the following day to opposing counsel by noon the preceding business day.

Counsel should arrive by 8:15 at the latest every day to discuss any issues with the Court before the jury arrives. Trial will run from 8:30 to 3:00 Monday, September 16 through Wednesday, September 18, although we may go longer on the 18th depending on how quickly the trial is progressing. The Court will advise the jury that counsel hopes to get the case to them by September 21, although the trial may spill over to Monday, September 23, 2019. There will be no trial proceedings on September 19 and 20.

If the parties resolve this matter prior to trial, they shall immediately notify the Court and file a notice on the docket.

This Order disposes of Docket Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 76, 77, 78.

IT IS SO ORDERED.