338 F.3d 448, 457 (5th Cir.2003) (citing Sullivan v. Rowan Cos., 952 F.2d 141, 147 (5th Cir.1992)). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide for judgment as a matter of law where a party, having “been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial,” has not established a “legally sufficient evidentiary basis” for its claim or defense, such that no “reasonable jury” could find for that party on that issue. Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a)(1) (emphasis added). However, judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Rule 50 applies only to jury trials, not actions tried to the court with an advisory jury. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a)(1); Martin Midstream Partners v. Boone Towing Inc., 207 Fed.Appx. 439, 440 (5th Cir.2006) (unpublished); see also Federal Ins. Co. v. HPSC, Inc., 480 F.3d 26, 32 (1st Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); Fillmore v. Page, 358 F.3d 496, 503 (7th
holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply to proceedings other than criminal trials holding that juveniles are not entitled to jury trials holding that by its terms rule 50 applies only to jury trials holding that due process requires exclusionary rule to be applied in state trials holding that the strictures of rule 50 do not apply in nonjury trials