did not abuse its discretion by admitting defendants’ exhibits into evidence. An adequate foundation was laid, the exhibits were relevant, and the exhibits were admissible for a nonhearsay purpose. See Haddad v. Lockheed Cal. Corp., 720 F.2d 1454, 1456 (9th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the district court did not abuse
holding that statements offered to establish defendants state of mind in making an employment decision and  not offered for the truth of the matter asserted are not hearsay holding that a complaints bare assertions alone were insufficient for certification holding that complaints are not hearsay when offered not for the truth of the complaints but instead to show employers receipt of complaints and employers nondiscriminatory intent in its employment practices holding that the admission of a report was not hearsay because it was not offered to prove its truth but to impeach the veracity of the witnesss direct testimony holding that plaintiff cannot establish pretext because she is unable to show any causal connection her complaints and the adverse action