Motorola Inc. v. J.B. Rogers Mechanical Contractors, Inc.

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-Appellant J.B. Rogers Mechanical Contractors, Inc. (“JBR”) appeals the district court’s denial of its Motion for New Trial, its Motion for Relief from *756 Judgment, and the award of attorneys’ fees in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Motorola, Inc. We affirm.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The district court’s determination of whether a jury’s verdict is irreconcilably inconsistent with its answers to special interrogatories is reviewed de novo. Wilks v. Reyes, 5 F.3d 412, 415 (9th Cir.1993). All other trial and post-trial error alleged by JBR is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Pierce Packing Co. v. John Morrell & Co., 633 F.2d 1362, 1364 (9th Cir.1980) (admissibility of evidence); Jones v. Williams, 297 F.3d 930, 934 (9th Cir.2002) (rejection of a proposed jury instruction); Landes Constr. Co. v. Royal Bank of Can., 833 F.2d 1365, 1372 (9th Cir.1987) (new trial because the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence); De Saracho v. Custom Food Mach., Inc., 206 F.3d 874 , 881 (9th Cir.2000) (newly-discovered evidence); Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA 317 F.3d 1097, 1102 (9th Cir.2003) (fee award pursuant to state law).

ANALYSIS

1. Reconciling the Jury’s…