A consumer has sued the manufacturer of a microwave oven for burn injuries allegedly caused by the manufacturer's negligent failure to warn purchasers of the dangers of heating foods in certain types of containers. The consumer has offered into evidence three letters, all received by the manufacturer before the oven was shipped to the consumer, in which customers had complained of serious burns under circumstances similar to those in the consumer's case. The manufacturer has objected to the letters on the grounds of hearsay and, in the alternative, has asked for a limiting instruction directing that the letters be considered not for the truth of the assertions contained in them but only regarding the issue of notice. How should the court respond? Group of answer choices The court should overrule the objection and deny the request for a limiting instruction. The court should overrule the objection but allow only that the letters be read to the jury, not received as exhibits. The court should sustain the objection and treat the request for a limiting instruction as moot. The court should overrule the objection and give the limiting instruction