What is the test for denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds of irrelevant evidence?

In response to appellant's argument that the evidence was irrelevant, we need only point to Moran v. H.W.S. Lumber Co., 538 F.2d 238 (9th Cir.1976), where we held that "the admission or exclusion of evidence on grounds of relevancy is in the federal courts a matter for the trial court's judgment, and is not a ground for reversal unless such action is inconsistent with substantial justice." Id. at 243. Appellant's argument does not convince us that the admission of this evidence was inconsistent with substantial justice. The district court's denial of a new trial on this basis was therefore not an abuse of discretion.