Reihanifam v. Fresenius Medical Care North America

MEMORANDUM

Mohsen Reihanifam appeals from a jury verdict in favor of Fresenius Medical Care North America (“Fresenius”) in Reihani-fam’s employment action. He claims that the district court (1) lacked subject matter jurisdiction; (2) abused its discretion in conducting voir dire; (3) permitted misconduct on the part of Fresenius; (4) denied Reihanifam an opportunity to cross-examine a defense witness; and (5) improperly excluded testimony related to product quality and safety issues. We review subject matter jurisdiction de novo, Dep’t of Fair Emp’t & Hous. v. Lucent Techs., Inc., 642 F.3d 728, 736 (9th Cir. 2011), and we review evidentiary and procedural rulings for abuse of discretion, Wagner v. Cty. of Maricopa, 747 F.3d 1048, 1062 (9th Cir. 2013). We affirm.

The district court’s jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 depends on whether, “at the time when the final judgment [was] entered only diverse parties remain[ed].... ” McCabe v. General Foods Corp., 811 F.2d 1336, 1338 (9th Cir. 1987). Because the allegedly non-diverse defendant identified by Reihanifam had been voluntarily dismissed as a party prior to trial, “the fact that at an earlier point there were non-diverse…