had a slightly different suspension.” Id. Thus, the probative value of this piece of evidence was negligible, while the risk of confusing the issues and misleading the jury was significant. See Fed.R.Evid. 403. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit the article. B. Plaintiffs next argue that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to admit three memoranda prepared by staff members of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (the “NHTSA”). Those memoranda related to a petition filed with the NHTSA in 1986 by Colorado Congressman Timothy Wirth, which asked that agency to establish stability standards for certain types of pas Ed.2d 535 (1997); United States v. Ramirez, 45 F.3d 1096, 1101 (7th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Smith cites no ease law in which Rule
holding that police report containing victim affidavit was not admissible under public records exception holding that an automobiles title history was admissible under the public records exception holding that copies of defendants convictions contained in pen packet were admissible under public records exception holding that data pulled from records regularly kept by the montana department of environmental quality was admissible under the public records exception to the hearsay rule holding that municipal court records were admissible under  official records or public documents  exception