Martinez

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LISAMARIA MARTINEZ, Case No. 20-cv-06570-TSH

8 Plaintiff,

PRETRIAL ORDER

9 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 103, 104, 110, 111 10 COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 13 I. MOTIONS IN LIMINE 14 Pending before the Court are Plaintiff Lisamaria Martinez’s Motions in Limine, ECF Nos. 15 110, 111, and Defendant Alameda County’s Motions in Limine, ECF Nos. 103, 104. For the 16 reasons stated below, the Court DENIES Defendant’s Motions in Limine Nos. 1–2, GRANTS IN 17 PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 3, GRANTS Plaintiff’s 18 Motion in Limine No. 1, and DENIES Plaintiff’s Motions in Limine Nos. 2–4. 19 A. Legal Standard 20 Motions in limine are a “procedural mechanism to limit in advance testimony or evidence 21 in a particular area.” United States v. Heller, 551 F.3d 1108, 1111 (9th Cir. 2009). Like other 22 pretrial motions, motions in limine are “useful tools to resolve issues which would otherwise 23 clutter up the trial.” City of…