P is a farmer in the Hatch, NM; the plaintiff grows corn and green chiles. After harvesting the green chiles, the plaintiff packs them in boxes and ships them to dealers in other states. P bought oodles of boxes from D, a large manufacturer of the sturdy boxes that P likes to use. P bought one whole shipment of boxes that had a hidden defect in them. P ruined three shipments of chiles when these shoddy boxes fell apart. P sued D in the United States District Court for New Mexico. Assume that the court has jurisdiction and venue for purposes of this question. At jury selection, the defendant's attorney asks each potential juror on the panel if they've every had to deal with a dispute with a good supplier. Juror #33 replied that he had. A long time he had a problem with a shipment of frozen French fries to his restaurant. Juror #33 said it hurt his bottom line, but he could be impartial regardless because he's a fair and rational man. D challenged Juror #33 for cause because he cannot be impartial because of a prior bad experience. The judge denied the motion to strike for cause, and D was ultimately forced to seat the juror on the jury. The jury came back with a verdict for P. The defendant appeals the verdict because the judge erred when it denied the motion to strike Juror #33 for cause. Assume the issue is properly preserved for appeal.

Did the judge commit reversible error when she denied the defendant's challenge to Juror #33 for cause? Explain.

Please answer the question in an IRAC Format : Such as (Issue/ Rules / Analysis/ Conclusion )