Multidistrict litigation is meant to “promote the just and efficient conduct” of actions “involving one or more common questions of fact” by transferring those actions to a single district court “for coordinated or...more
As Nobel laureate Richard Feynman once observed, “[w]isdom is knowing when to ask the right questions.” A related proposition is that wise jurists know how to identify and focus on the right questions. Motion practice can...more
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - Siples v. BR Exploration – Daubert, causation testimony, toxic exposure - Lozman v. Riviera Bch – eminent domain, comprehensive plan, ripeness - Hidroelectrica Santa Rita v....more
Court: Superior Court of Rhode Island, Providence - In this asbestos action, plaintiffs claim decedent, Bonnie J. Bonito, developed mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos from laundering her late ex-husband’s work clothing...more
Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana - This case involves claims of asbestos exposure. Plaintiff Robert Stephen Sentilles initiated this action asserting negligence and strict...more
United States District Court for the Northern District of California - In this wrongful death action, it is claimed that Decedent William Ankiel Jr. had exposure to asbestos-containing equipment during his service aboard a...more
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit - In this action, plaintiff Climmie Craft filed suit in this matter asserting that she contracted asbestos-related lung cancer as a consequence of her take-home exposure to...more
The United States patent system is designed to be a balance: in exchange for the inventor disclosing their invention to the public, pa-tentees are granted exclusive rights to that invention for a period of time. This ensures...more
Federal Rules of Evidence 701 and 702 govern the admissibility of lay and expert opinion testimony, respectively, in federal courts. Rule 701(c) helps paint the line between the two, providing that an opinion “based on...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more
In patent litigation, expert witnesses play a crucial role in providing specialized knowledge to the court. In a recent case where Osseo Imaging LLC sued Planmeca USA Inc. for patent infringement, the Federal Circuit...more
Parkervision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1755, 2024-2221 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 6, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit weighed in again on a 13-year-old patent dispute concerning Qualcomm’s...more
New Amendment Reiterates and Reinforces the Existing Standard for Admissibility of Expert Testimony - On December 1, 2023, the United States Supreme Court adopted the Rules Committee’s proposed Amendment to the Federal...more
Court: United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division - In this asbestos action, defendants Atwood & Morrill Co. Inc. and Warren Pumps LLC filed a Daubert motion to exclude, or limit, certain...more
When scientific evidence is in play, it is often assumed that the most frequently cited articles are published in the most elite journals. However, this is not necessarily true. A journal is ranked according to its impact...more
As patent practitioners know, Daubert motions can be some of the most hotly contested and pivotal motions in the life of a patent case. These motions are used to exclude testimony from an opponent's expert witness, usually on...more
In Cody v. City of St. Louis, 103 F.4th 523 (8th Cir. 2024), the Eight Circuit maintained its position that admissibility standards do not apply strictly at the class certification stage, thereby solidifying a circuit split...more
In December 2023, back when the ink was still drying on the amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Southern District of New York excluded all five general causation experts proffered by plaintiffs in the In re...more
US courts are issuing guidelines to ensure litigators disclose any use of generative AI in legal proceedings. By now, most of us have heard a story about the misuse of generative AI in the practice of law: the attorney...more
As we reported in April, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified a question on California’s Learned Intermediary Doctrine in Himes v. Somatics, LLC, 2022 WL 989469 (9th Cir. Apr. 1, 2022). The...more
A recent decision by Judge Novak in a securities case provides some helpful reminders on expert witness practice, particularly in commercial litigation, in the EDVA....more
When tasked with assessing the admissibility of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, courts often cite the so-called Daubert factors as criteria that guide the inquiry. Among those factors is “whether the...more
In explaining the December 2023 amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Advisory Committee called out several ways in which “many courts” had “incorrectly” applied Rule 702 and failed to adequately discharge their...more
Predominance and Classwide Damage Models. The Ninth Circuit held that class action plaintiffs may rely on a reliable though not-yet-executed damages model (in this case a proposed but not done conjoint analysis) to...more
A recent decision by Senior District Judge Robert Payne on a Daubert motion in class action litigation against a pension fund offers some helpful lessons on challenging expert witnesses in the EDVA. Trauernicht v. Genworth...more