Ruggers Corp. is a maker of a range of highly popular cruise motorcycles. Tim buys a Ruggers motorcycle from a dealership and suffers an accident. While recuperating from his injuries, he learns that Ruggers has recalled all motorcycles it had manufactured and sold in the previous two years, owing to a previously unknown defect in their braking systems. Tim brings a product liability lawsuit against the motorcycle manufacturer and claims $50,000 in damages. The defect in the motorcycle is found to be half responsible for the accident, while Tim's own negligence of traffic rules contributed to the rest. Under the doctrine of contributory negligence, what would be the ruling of the court hearing this case?

A. Tim can recover $50,000 worth of damages from the motorcycle manufacturer.

B. Tim can recover $50,000 worth of damages, plus any punitive damages that may be awarded by the jury.

C. Tim can recover $25,000 worth of damages from Ruggers and the rest from the dealership from which he purchased the motorcycle.

D. Tim cannot recover any damages from the motorcycle manufacturer.