The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has issued an important decision on expert testimony, Hughes v. Kia Motors.
Patricia Hughes filed a wrongful death action against Kia Motors after her daughter,...more
In Hughes v. Kia Motors Corp., No. 13-10922, the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the district court’s exclusion of the plaintiff’s expert witness in a motor vehicle product liability case. Allene Hughes, the plaintiff’s...more
The weight of expert testimony in product liability cases can hardly be overstated. Because complex questions of scientific and medical causation often hold sway, juries are thirsty for someone to tell them what the evidence...more
In the three earlier articles of this series, I discussed the reasons why you need to cross-examine an expert witness, the four main advantages a trial lawyer has over an expert witness, and the four stages of general...more
Following defendant Monster’s filing of a motion for summary judgment, the patentee provided declarations by two expert witnesses in opposition. Monster noticed depositions of these experts, but the patentee moved for a...more
Attorneys risk expert contamination when they provide information to an expert about a case. Although you need to discuss the case candidly and openly with your expert, you don’t want to contaminate the expert with...more
In eBay Inc. v. Lockwood, CBM2014-00025, Paper 34, CBM2014-00026, Paper 35 (August 12, 2014) the Board denied eBay’s motion to expunge the declaration of its expert, directed to unpatenability of the prior art, which eBay...more
In the first part of this article series, I described the reasons that a trial attorney needs to cross-examine an expert witness.
Against the expert witness defending his home territory, the trial lawyer has four main...more
Last month, we were excited to publish our article, The Use of Expert Witnesses for Penalty Determinations in Criminal Antitrust Cases: A Study of United States v. AU Optronics, in Antitrust Magazine. The article examines...more
Falcon v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 1:12-CV-491-DAE, 2014 WL 2711849 (W.D. Tex. June 16, 2014) -
The Western District of Texas finds that a policyholder’s expert witness is not qualified to opine when he does not...more
City of Pomona v. SQM North America Corporation -
Court Of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Nos. 12-55147, 12-55193 (May 2, 2014) -
Under Federal Rule of Evidence (“FRE”) 702, expert witness testimony must meet certain...more
Should you hire multiple experts on the same topic? There are some very good reasons to use this strategy.
If the case justifies the expense, retaining multiple consultants in the same field has a variety of advantages....more
Two weeks earlier, the court excluded the expert opinion and testimony of Plaintiff Golden Bridge Technology's ("GBT") damages expert. Nonetheless, the court gave GBT one week to submit a new report based on a new theory....more
Plaintiff Trading Technologies International, Inc. ("TT") moved to strike the invalidity expert report of the defendant, CQG. TT made two arguments its motion: " that Dr. Mellor failed to conduct a proper written description...more
Novartis sought to use the deposition testimony of defendant's expert at trial under Fed.R.Civ.P. 32(a)(4)(B). As explained by the district court, "the Rule provides that a party may use the deposition of a witness for any...more
In GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc., (IPR2014-00041), Paper 22 (IPR2014-00043), Paper 23, (IPR2014-00051), Paper 21 (IPR2014-00054), Paper 18 (IPR2014-00055), Paper 14 (April 15, 2014), the patent owner...more
Causation is the crux of any toxic tort litigation. The Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Cornell v. 360 West 51st Street Realty, LLC, No. 16 (N.Y. Mar. 27, 2014) underscores that principle and revisits the causation...more
Plantronics, Inc. ("Plantronics") filed a patent infringement action against ALIPH, Inc. ("ALIPH"). After expert reports were submitted, ALIPH moved to exclude the expert report of Plantronics' infringement expert.
On January 15, the en banc US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in Barabin v. AstenJohnson, Inc. that significantly strengthened and expanded the gatekeeper role of both trial and appellate courts in...more
Just because an expert says something is so doesn't mean that it is. That's the lesson of Judge Gale's ruling last week in Carter v. Clements Walker. He rejected the evidentiary value of an expert's report stating that...more
After the Berkeley City Council (“City”) approved a mixed-use commercial and residential project on the site of a former car dealership and service garage, a community group sued, claiming that pre-existing contamination on...more
There are two trends increasing the costs of patent litigation.
The first is the increased use of Daubert motions to exclude the opinion of opposing damage experts as unqualified or unreliable. The practical result...more
Taser International, Inc. ("Taser') proceeded to trial on its patent infringement action against Karbon Arms, LLC ("Karbon Arms"). After expert reports and with the trial approaching, Taser filed a motion to exclude the...more
Pennsylvania’s intermediate appellate court recently affirmed an order granting summary judgment for Rohm and Haas (R&H) in a chemical exposure wrongful death action, finding the plaintiff’s expert’s opinion regarding...more
Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. ("Kimberly-Clark) filed a patent infringement action against First Quality Baby Products, LLC ("First Quality") over a variety of patents relating to disposable absorbent products, such as...more
Back to Top