Lanell Jones v. City of Oakland

MEMORANDUM

Lanell Monique Jones challenges various pretrial rulings made by the district court and its order granting judgment as a matter of law in favor of the City of Oakland (the City) in this case. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by holding six pretrial conferences. The record establishes that the district court held each pretrial conference for the valid purpose of improving the quality of the trial by ensuring that the parties were prepared. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(a). There is no evidence that the district court held these pretrial conferences and issued multiple pretrial orders because the district court was biased against Jones.

The district court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded the Negotiated' Settlement Agreement (NSA) (exhibit 13(B)), the Amended Memorandum of Understanding (AMOU) (exhibit 13(C)), the 2012 report from the audit of the Oakland Police Department (exhibit 13(E)), Judge Henderson’s order appointing a compliance director (exhibit 13(F)), and the 2011 fifth quarterly report by the independent monitor (exhibit 16) on the ground that the probative value of those…