Banga

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NAVJEET SINGH BANGA,

Case No. 16-cv-04270-RS Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE 12 CHRIS GUS KANIOS, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 Both parties in this case have filed and fully briefed pretrial motions in limine (“MIL”). For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff’s MIL No. 13 is denied, Defendants’ MIL No. 1 is denied, and Defendants’ MIL No. 2 is granted. I. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE Plaintiff’s MIL No. 131 seeks to limit or preclude testimony of Defendants’ witnesses at trial that is “outside of their percipient knowledge, and improperly verges on expert testimony.” Dkt. 479, at 1. Besides being filed late, the MIL is non-specific as to what testimony from each witness it specifically seeks to exclude. Plaintiff relies heavily, but incorrectly, on Rule 702’s reference to “specialized knowledge” as falling within the realm of expert testimony. However, the Rule does not apply simply because a witness seeks…