With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". defendant’s motion in limine #14 directed at the vast majority of these exhibits. Without an expert witness, most of plaintiff’s exhibits were not admissible. Staley, as a percipient witness, was not qualified to lay a foundation for the exhibits or to authenticate them, and the exhibits, which plaintiff sought to offer for the truth of the matters asserted in them, were hearsay, for which no exception applied. (Docket # 342.) 8 . ASA filed an amicus brief in support of defendant. (Docket # 334.) In its discretion, the court declines to consider the brief; instead, it resolves this case solely upon its assessment of the evidence proffered by plaintiff in its case-in-chief. See Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene, No. CV-F092234 LJO/DLB, 2010 WL 1949146, *2 (E.D.Cal. May 11, 2010) (<HOLDING>). 9 . Of significance, plaintiff wholly failed

A: recognizing privilege
B: recognizing that the privilege of being a heard amicus rests solely within the discretion of the court
C: holding that the decision to transfer rests within the sound discretion of the district court
D: holding that the decision to transfer rests within the sound discretion of the court
B.