A plaintiff sued a defendant in federal court for medical malpractice. During jury selection, the defendant's attorney asked the potential jurors whether they had ever been involved in a medical malpractice lawsuit. One potential juror stated that he had been a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case and was distrustful of doctors because of his experience. The defendant's attorney used a peremptory strike against this potential juror. Another potential juror, a doctor, had been sued for medical malpractice twice in the past, but she denied ever being involved in a medical malpractice suit. She was selected for the jury along with 11 others. During the course of the trial, one juror was excused because he became ill. The case went to the jury, and the 11 jurors returned with a unanimous verdict for the defendant. Shortly thereafter, the plaintiff discovered through independent investigation that the juror who was a doctor had lied. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial on the grounds that the defendant's attorney had exercised his peremptory strike for an improper reason, that a juror lied during the jury selection process, and that the verdict was rendered by less than the required 12 jurors. Is the court likely to grant the plaintiff's motion? A. Yes, because the defendant's attorney exercised his peremptory strike for an improper reason.
B. Yes, because the juror who is a doctor lied during the jury selection process.
C. Yes, because juries in federal civil cases must have 12 jurors.
D. No, because there was no court error or juror misconduct in this case.