Silva

*134 MEMORANDUM **

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm on all issues. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recount them here.

The district court properly permitted the joinder of multiple counts in the indictment relating to two separate offenses. 1 Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 8(a) allows joinder of charges that are of the same or similar character.

The district court acted well within its discretion when it denied the motion to sever the counts related to the January 2002 offense from the counts related to the July 2002 offense. 3 Even if that decision had been an abuse of discretion, Silva failed to renew his motion to sever under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 14(a) at the close of the evidence and did not diligently pursue the motion. Thus, he forfeited the issue on appeal.

The district court properly allowed the Government to call an expert rebuttal witness. 5 Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 does not require the Government to give notice of expert rebuttal testimony. 6 In addition, Rule 12.2.1(c) of the Local Criminal Rules for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California…