Pierce

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAJI PIERCE, et al., Case No. 21-cv-04325-AGT

Plaintiffs,

ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE

v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 143–152

EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY

DISTRICT, et al., Defendants.

The Court issues these rulings on the parties’ motions in limine. A. Plaintiffs’ Motions in Limine MIL No. 1: The Court denies Saji Pierce’s motion to exclude all evidence of her repro- ductive health. Defendants “intend only to make limited use” of this evidence, dkt. 146 at 9, and the evidence may be relevant to Pierce’s demand for emotional-distress damages. See Smith for J.L. v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist., No. 16-CV-2358-SS, 2018 WL 6137133, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2018) (“A party may seek to challenge a claim for emotional distress damages by offering evidence of other stressors in a plaintiff’s life.”). Pierce hasn’t persuaded the Court that the probative value of this evidence will be substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prej- udice, delay, or confusion of the issues. As for Pierce’s procedural argument, the Court isn’t convinced that defendants improp- erly obtained Pierce’s medical records. Defendants…