Stutes v. Parrish et al

Filing 125

PROPOSED FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED). Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on February 8, 2016. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/8/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

DAVID WAYNE STUTES,

Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

15

FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
(ANNOTATED)

J. PARRISH, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
The parties shall file any objections not previously lodged with the Court by February 12,

18
19

2016.

20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

Dated: February 8, 2016
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28

1
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5

I.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
1. DUTY OF JURY

Members of the Jury: Now that you have heard all of the evidence and will hear the arguments of
the attorneys, it is my duty to instruct you as to the law of the case.
Each of you has received a copy of these instructions that you may take with you to the jury room
to consult during your deliberations.

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

You must not infer from these instructions or from anything I may say or do as indicating that I
have an opinion regarding the evidence or what your verdict should be.
It is your duty to find the facts from all the evidence in the case. To those facts you will apply the
law as I give it to you. You must follow the law as I give it to you whether you agree with it or
not. And you must not be influenced by any personal likes or dislikes, opinions, prejudices, or
sympathy. That means that you must decide the case solely on the evidence before you. You will
recall that you took an oath to do so.
In following my instructions, you must follow all of them and not single out some and ignore
others; they are all important.

13
14

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.1C (2007 Edition).

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2

2. BURDEN OF PROOF – PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE

3

When a party has the burden of proof on any claim by a preponderance of the evidence, it means
you must be persuaded by the evidence that the claim is more probably true than not true.

4

You should base your decision on all of the evidence, regardless of which party presented it.

5
6

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.3 (2007 Edition).

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3

3. TWO OR MORE PARTIES – DIFFERENT LEGAL RIGHTS
You should decide the case as to each party separately. Unless otherwise stated, the instructions
apply to all parties.

4
5

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.5 (2007 Edition).

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4

4. WHAT IS EVIDENCE
The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are consists of:
(1) the sworn testimony of any witness;
(2) the exhibits which are received in evidence; and
(3) any facts to which the lawyers have agreed.

5
6
Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.6 (2007 Edition).
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

5. WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE

2

In reaching your verdict, you may consider only the testimony and exhibits received into evidence.
Certain things are not evidence, and you may not consider them in deciding what the facts are. I
will list them for you:
(1) Arguments and statements by lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers are not
witnesses. What they have said in their opening statements, will say in their
closing arguments, and at other times is intended to help you interpret the evidence,
but it is not evidence. If the facts as you remember them differ from the way the
lawyers have stated them, your memory of them controls.
(2) Questions and objections by lawyers are not evidence. Attorneys have a duty to
their clients to object when they believe a question is improper under the rules of
evidence. You should not be influenced by the objection or by the Court’s ruling
on it.
(3) Testimony that has been excluded or stricken, or that you have been instructed to
disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition, sometimes
testimony and exhibits are received only for a limited purpose; when I give a
limiting instruction, you must follow it.
(4) Anything you may have seen or heard when the Court was not in session is not
evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received at the trial.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.7 (2007 Edition).
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

6
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

6. EVIDENCE FOR LIMITED PURPOSE

2

Some evidence may be admitted for a limited purpose only.

3

When I instruct you that an item of evidence has been admitted for a limited purpose, you must
consider it only for that limited purpose and for no other.

4
5
6

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.8 (2007 Edition).
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

7
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5

7. DIRECT OR CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such as
testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or heard or did. Circumstantial
evidence is proof of one or more facts from which you could find another fact. You should
consider both kinds of evidence. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to
either direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide how much weight to give to any
evidence.

6
7

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.9 (2007 Edition).

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

8
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3

8. CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES
In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to believe and which
testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness says, or part of it, or none of it.
Proof of a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of witnesses who testify about it.

4
5
6
7
8

In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:
(1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the things testified to;
(2) the witness’s memory;
(3) the witness’s manner while testifying;
(4) the witness’s interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or prejudice;
(5) whether other evidence contradicted the witness’s testimony;
(6) the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the evidence; and
(7) any other factors that bear on believability.

9
10

The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of witnesses
who testify about it.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 1.11 (2007 Edition).

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

9
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

9. IMPEACHMENT EVIDENCE – WITNESS

2

The evidence that a witness has testified in an inconsistent manner with his or her prior testimony
or statements may be considered, along with all other evidence, in deciding whether or not to
believe the witness and how much weight to give to the testimony of the witness and for no other
purpose.

3
4
5
6

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 2.8 (2007 Edition).

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

10
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

10. USE OF INTERROGATORIES OF A PARTY

2

Evidence has been presented to you in the form of answers of one of the parties to written
interrogatories submitted by the other side. These answers were given in writing and under oath,
before the actual trial, in response to questions that were submitted in writing under established
court procedures. You should consider the answers, insofar as possible, in the same way as if they
were made from the witness stand.

3
4
5
6
7

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 2.10 (2007 Edition)

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

11
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

11. STIPULATIONS OF FACT
The parties have agreed to certain facts that will be read to you. You should therefore treat these
facts as having been proved.
The stipulated facts are as follows:
1. On June 23, 2013, the Defendant Deputies responded to a report of domestic violence.
The same day, Plaintiff was arrested for domestic violence and ultimately charged with
two counts of domestic violence. Plaintiff was tried on both counts. After a trial, a
unanimous jury found Plaintiff not guilty of both counts.
2. At the relevant time, Plaintiff’s home was a trailer in Morgan Hill
3. At around 3:30 pm on June 23, 2013, Defendants Parrish, Catalano, Barton, and Leslie
arrived at Plaintiff’s home.
4. Plaintiff arrived at his home sometime after the deputies arrived.
5. Defendants had not obtained a warrant prior to searching Plaintiff’s trailer or seizing his
property.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 2.2 (2007 Edition)

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

12
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

II.

CAUSES OF ACTION

2

12. INTRODUCTION

3

The plaintiff brings his claim under the federal statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides that any
person or persons who, under color of law, deprives another of any rights, privileges, or
immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States shall be liable to the injured
party.

4
5
6

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 9.1 (2007 Edition)

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

13
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

13. PARTICULAR RIGHTS—FOURTH AMENDMENT—UNREASONABLE SEARCH—
GENERALLY

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

As previously explained, the plaintiff has the burden to prove that the acts of the defendants
Deputy Jessica Parrish, Deputy Michael Leslie, Deputy Shannon Catalano, or Deputy Eric Barton
deprived the plaintiff of particular rights under the United States Constitution. In this case, the
plaintiff alleges the defendants deprived him of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the
Constitution when they searched his home.
Under the Fourth Amendment, a person has the right to be free from an unreasonable search of his
residence. In order to prove a defendant deprived the plaintiff of this Fourth Amendment right, the
plaintiff must prove the following additional elements by a preponderance of the evidence:
(1) The defendant searched the plaintiff’s residence; and
(2) The search was unreasonable.

9
10

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 9.11 (2007 Edition)

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

14
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

14. PARTICULAR RIGHTS—FOURTH AMENDMENT—EXCEPTION TO WARRANT
REQUIREMENT—CONSENT

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

In general, a search of a person’s residence is presumed to be unreasonable under the Fourth
Amendment if the search is not authorized by a search warrant. A "search warrant" is a written
order signed by a judge that permits a law enforcement officer to search a particular person, place,
or thing. Under an exception to this rule, a search warrant is not required and a search is
reasonable if the person knowingly and voluntarily consents to the search.
A person acts “knowingly” if the person acts with an awareness that particular circumstances
exist.
In determining whether a consent to search is voluntary, consider all of the circumstances,
including:
(1) whether the consenting person was in custody;
(2) whether officers’ guns were drawn;
(3) whether the consenting person was told he or she had the right to refuse a request to
search;
(4) whether the consenting person was told he or she was free to leave;
(5) whether Miranda warnings were given;
(6) whether the consenting person was told a search warrant could be obtained;
(7) any other circumstances applicable to the particular case.
In order to prove the search in this case was unreasonable, the plaintiff must prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that this exception to the warrant requirement does not apply.

15
16

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 9.13 (2007 Edition)

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

15
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

15. PARTICULAR RIGHTS—FOURTH AMENDMENT—UNREASONABLE SEIZURE
OF PROPERTY—GENERALLY

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

As previously explained, the plaintiff has the burden to prove that the acts of the defendants
Deputy Jessica Parrish, Deputy Michael Leslie, Deputy Shannon Catalano, or Deputy Eric Barton
deprived the plaintiff of particular rights under the United States Constitution. In this case, the
plaintiff alleges the defendants deprived him of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the
Constitution when they seized his property.
Under the Fourth Amendment, a person has the right to be free from an unreasonable seizure of
his property. In order to prove a defendant deprived the plaintiff of this Fourth Amendment right,
the plaintiff must prove the following additional elements by a preponderance of the evidence:
(1) The defendant seized the plaintiff’s property; and
(2) The seizure was unreasonable.
A person “seizes” the property of the plaintiff when the person takes possession of or controls the
property in a manner that meaningfully interferes with the plaintiff’s right to possess the property.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 9.16 (2007 Edition)

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

16
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

16. PARTICULAR RIGHTS—FOURTH AMENDMENT—UNREASONABLE SEIZURE
OF PROPERTY—EXCEPTIONS TO WARRANT REQUIREMENT

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

In general, a seizure of a person’s property is presumed to be unreasonable under the Fourth
Amendment unless the seizure is authorized by a warrant. Under an exception to this rule, a
warrant is not required and a seizure is reasonable if the person knowingly and voluntarily
consents to the seizure.
A person acts “knowingly” if the person acts with an awareness that particular circumstances
exist.
In determining whether a consent to a seizure is voluntary, consider all of the circumstances,
including:
(1) whether the consenting person was in custody;
(2) whether officers’ guns were drawn;
(3) whether the consenting person was told he or she had the right to refuse a request to
search;
(4) whether the consenting person was told he or she was free to leave;
(5) whether Miranda warnings were given;
(6) whether the consenting person was told a search warrant could be obtained;
(7) any other circumstances applicable to the particular case.
Thus, in order to prove the seizure in this case was unreasonable, the plaintiff must prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that this exception does not apply.

14
15

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 9.17 (2007 Edition)

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

17
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

17. CAUSATION
In order to establish that the acts of the defendants Deputy Jessica Parrish, Deputy Michael Leslie,
Deputy Shannon Catalano, or Deputy Eric Barton deprived the plaintiff of his particular rights
under the United States Constitution as explained in later instructions, the plaintiff must prove by
a preponderance of the evidence that the acts were so closely related to the deprivation of the
plaintiff’s rights as to be a moving force that caused the ultimate injury.
Many factors or things or the conduct of two or more persons can operate at the same time either
independently or together to cause injury or damage and in such a case each may be a cause of the
injury or damage.

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions – 9.8 (2007 Edition)

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

18
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

III.

DAMAGES
18. DAMAGES—PROOF

It is the duty of the Court to instruct you about the measure of damages. By instructing you on
damages, the Court does not mean to suggest for which party your verdict should be rendered.
If you find for the plaintiff on the plaintiff’s illegal search and seizure claims, you must determine
the plaintiff’s damages. The plaintiff has the burden of proving damages by a preponderance of the
evidence. Damages means the amount of money that will reasonably and fairly compensate the
plaintiff for any injury you find was caused by the defendants.
In determining the measure of damages, you should consider:
(1) The nature and extent of any injuries;
(2) The mental and emotional pain and suffering experienced;
(3) Any harm to reputation within the community;
(4) The reasonable value of wages, earnings, earning capacity, employment, or business
or employment opportunities lost to the present time; and
(5) The reasonable value of necessary repairs to any property which was damaged.

12

It is for you to determine what damages, if any, have been proved.

13

Your award must be based upon evidence and not upon speculation, guesswork, or conjecture.

14
15

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instruction - 5.1 & 5.2 (2007 Edition).

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

19
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

19. PUNITIVE DAMAGES
If you find for the plaintiff, you may, but are not required to, award punitive damages. The
purposes of punitive damages are to punish a defendant and to deter similar acts in the future.
Punitive damages may not be awarded to compensate a plaintiff.
The plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that punitive damages
should be awarded, and, if so, the amount of any such damages.
You may award punitive damages only if you find that the defendant’s conduct that harmed the
plaintiff was malicious, oppressive or in reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights. Conduct is
malicious if it is accompanied by ill will, or spite, or if it is for the purpose of injuring the plaintiff.
Conduct is in reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights if, under the circumstances, it reflects
complete indifference to the plaintiff’s safety or rights, or if the defendant acts in the face of a
perceived risk that its actions will violate the plaintiff’s rights under federal law. An act or
omission is oppressive if the defendant injures or damages or otherwise violates the rights of the
plaintiff with unnecessary harshness or severity, such as by the misuse or abuse of authority or
power.
If you find that punitive damages are appropriate, you must use reason in setting the amount.
Punitive damages, if any, should be in an amount sufficient to fulfill their purposes but should not
reflect bias, prejudice or sympathy toward any party. In considering the amount of any punitive
damages, consider the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct.
You may impose punitive damages against one or more of the defendants and not others, and may
award different amounts against different defendants. Punitive damages may be awarded even if
you award plaintiff only nominal, and not compensatory, damages.

15
16

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instruction – 5.5 (2007 Edition).

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

20
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3
4
5

IV.

CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS
20. DUTY TO DELIBERATE

When you begin your deliberations, you should elect one member of the jury as your presiding
juror. That person will preside over the deliberations and speak for you here in court.
You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement if you can do so. Your
verdict must be unanimous.

6
7
8
9

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only after you have
considered all of the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and listened to the views of
your fellow jurors.
Do not hesitate to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that you should. Do not
come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

It is important that you attempt to reach a unanimous verdict but, of course, only if each of you
can do so after having made your own conscientious decision. Do not change an honest belief
about the weight and effect of the evidence simply to reach a verdict.

13
14

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 3.1 (2007 Edition).

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

21
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

21. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE—CONDUCT OF THE JURY

2

Because you must base your verdict only on the evidence received in the case and on these
instructions, I remind you that you must not be exposed to any other information about the case or
to the issues it involves. Except for discussing the case with your fellow jurors during your
deliberations:

3
4
5
6
7
8

Do not communicate with anyone in any way and do not let anyone else communicate with you in
any way about the merits of the case or anything to do with it. This includes discussing the case in
person, in writing, by phone or electronic means, via email, text messaging, or any Internet chat
room, blog, website or other feature. This applies to communicating with your family members,
your employer, the media or press, and the people involved in the trial. If you are asked or
approached in any way about your jury service or anything about this case, you must respond that
you have been ordered not to discuss the matter and to report the contact to the court.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Do not read, watch, or listen to any news or media accounts or commentary about the case or
anything to do with it; do not do any research, such as consulting dictionaries, searching the
Internet or using other reference materials; and do not make any investigation or in any other way
try to learn about the case on your own.

12
13
14
15

The law requires these restrictions to ensure the parties have a fair trial based on the same
evidence that each party has had an opportunity to address. A juror who violates these restrictions
jeopardizes the fairness of these proceedings, and a mistrial could result that would require the
entire trial process to start over. If any juror is exposed to any outside information, please notify
the court immediately.

16
17

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 3.1A (2007 Edition).

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

22
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1

22. COMMUNICATION WITH COURT

2

If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me, you may send a note
through the Bailiff signed by your presiding juror or by one or more members of the jury. No
member of the jury should ever attempt to communicate with me except by a signed writing; I will
communicate with any member of the jury on anything concerning the case only in writing, or
here in open court. If you send out a question, I will consult with the parties before answering it,
which may take some time. You may continue your deliberations while waiting for the answer to
any question. Remember that you are not to tell anyone—including me—how the jury stands,
numerically or otherwise, until after you have reached a unanimous verdict or have been
discharged. Do not disclose any vote count in any note to the Court.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 3.2 (2007 Edition).

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

23
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)

1
2
3

23. RETURN OF VERDICT
A verdict form has been prepared for you. After you have reached unanimous agreement on a
verdict, your presiding juror will fill in the form that has been given to you, sign and date it, and
advise the Court that you are ready to return to the courtroom.

4
5

Source: Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instructions - 3.3 (2007 Edition).

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

24
Case No. 14-CV-02016-LHK
FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS (ANNOTATED)