... and the amount of back pay by a preponderance of the evidence. 2. Mitigation of Back Pay ... has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a reduction should be made and the amount by which the award ...
... the following additional elements by a preponderance of the evidence: First, the plaintiff [ name ] was engaged in conduct ... chronology of events may be considered as circumstantial evidence of a causal connection between the adverse action and the plaintiff [ ...
... the following additional elements by a preponderance of the evidence: First, [the plaintiff [ name ... case, the plaintiffs must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the officer s ”—plural—“used excessive ...
... of proving the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence: First, the plaintiff [ name ] was [discharged] ... ] has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence both that the defendant [ name ]’s decision to [ state ...
... by [clear and convincing] [a preponderance of the] evidence. The [owner] [assignor] [licensor] ... The defendant has the burden of proving abandonment. Evidence of non-use of the mark for three consecutive years is prima facie ...
... the defendant’s gross revenue by a preponderance of the evidence. Expenses are all [operating ... proving the defendant’s expenses by a preponderance of the evidence. Unless you find that a ...
... know that the conduct was unlawful. You may consider evidence of the defendant’s words, acts, or omissions, along with all the other evidence, in deciding whether the defendant acted willfully. ...
... know that the conduct was unlawful. You may consider evidence of the defendant’s words, acts, or omissions, along with all the other evidence, in deciding whether the defendant acted willfully. "Knowingly" ...
... [property] was necessary to prevent [destruction of evidence] [escape of a suspect] [physical harm to the officers or other ... [ name ] must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that this exception to the warrant requirement does not apply. ... case, the plaintiffs must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the officer s ”—plural—“used excessive ...
... an instruction on the character of the defendant when such evidence is admitted under Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(1) because it adds nothing to ... instructions regarding the consideration and weighing of evidence. See United States v. Karterman , 60 F.3d 576, 579 (9th Cir. 1995) ...