asserted grounds for a new trial all allege some type of evidentiary or trial error. This court considers these grounds for a new trial in the context of the harmless error standard of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which states: No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no error or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the court or by any of the parties is ground for granting a new trial ... unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with the substantial justice. The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error of defect in the proceeding which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties. Fed.R.Civ.P. 61; see also Perry v. Ethan Allen, Inc., 115 F.3d 143, 150 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). i. Order of Witnesses Plaintiffs third ground
recognizing under plain error review that the burden to show that substantial rights have been prejudiced is on the party that failed to raise the issue below and for an error to have affected substantial rights the error must have affected the outcome of the district court proceedings holding that constitutional error cannot be premised on error in a charge unless the error violated some right which was guaranteed to the defendant by the fourteenth amendment holding that the court will not conclude that a substantial right was affected unless it is likely that in some material respect the factfinders judgment was swayed by the error  holding that even if a defendant is able to show that there was a plain error that affected his substantial rights a court of appeals is not required to reverse a conviction unless it finds that the error seriously affected the fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings holding that a substantial right is affected when the error had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jurys verdict