News & Analysis as of

Daubert Standards Expert Testimony

Fenwick & West LLP

Key Federal Circuit Patent Rulings Impacting Your Business…

Fenwick & West LLP on

In EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, the en banc United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s denial of a new trial on damages because EcoFactor’s expert’s opinion was unreliable under Fed....more

Hudnell Law Group

Federal Circuit Enforces Gatekeeping Role in Patent Damages Testimony

Hudnell Law Group on

On May 21, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, reversed a $20 million damages award against Google LLC in a patent infringement dispute with EcoFactor, Inc. EcoFactor, Inc. v....more

White & Case LLP

Federal Circuit Tightens Standard for Patent Damages Experts

White & Case LLP on

On May 21, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, highlighting the critical gatekeeping role of district courts under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert standards,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

En Banc Federal Circuit Cools Damages Award Because of Improper Expert Testimony

McDermott Will & Emery on

In an en banc decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court abused its discretion by admitting testimony from a damages expert that a lump-sum...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC

EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2023-1101 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2025) In its first en banc decision of the year, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s admission of expert testimony concerning damages,...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC Probes the Limits for Gatekeeping Damages Testimony

Last week, in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, the Federal Circuit issued its first en banc decision in a utility patent case in several years. The case involves the gatekeeping function of district courts vis-à-vis expert...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

A Check on Experts in the Talcum Powder World

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On February 7, 2025, Judge Walker, sitting in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, ruled that the Plaintiff (a subsidiary of a parent company engaged in nationwide talcum powder litigation)...more

Stark & Stark

Court Affirms Admissibility of DTI-Based TBI Diagnosis in Oklahoma Federal Case

Stark & Stark on

In a significant decision for plaintiffs litigating traumatic brain injury (TBI) claims, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma has denied a defense motion to exclude expert testimony based on diffusion...more

Goodell, DeVries, Leech & Dann, LLP

Appellate Court Undermines Rochkind by Conflating Rule 5-702 and Rule 2-501

[DISCLOSURE: Although I do not represent the defendant hospital in Jabbi v. Adventist Healthcare, Inc. No. 2071 (Sept. Term, 2023) (March 5, 2025) (reported), I often represent Maryland hospitals seeking to exclude causation...more

Robinson Bradshaw

Old Dogs and New Tricks: Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Ninth Circuit Case Allowing Reliance on Inadmissible Expert Work for...

Robinson Bradshaw on

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Lytle v. Nutramax Laboratories, Inc. affirming the certification of a class of owners of elderly dogs, alleging that the...more

Knobbe Martens

New Trial Granted Because “Nearly All” of the Defendant’s Noninfringement Evidence Was Untimely

Knobbe Martens on

The district court erred by admitting untimely expert testimony on noninfringement and by refusing to grant a new trial after the jury found noninfringement. Trudell Medical International (“Trudell”) sued D R Burton...more

Montgomery McCracken

Recent Third Circuit Opinion Reinforces That Daubert Requires Courts to Examine the Data Underlying an Expert’s Analysis

Montgomery McCracken on

February 11, 2025 Types : Alerts Meta Platforms, Inc. recently defeated certification of a class of consumers who claim the company lied about its user privacy safeguards and violated antitrust laws. ...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Foundation, Not Façade — The Fifth Circuit Affirms the Proper Basis Requirement for Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Newsome v....

In a toxic tort case, plaintiffs must establish general causation. If a substance is incapable of causing the type of injury plaintiff claims, then it certainly didn’t cause theirs. Under Texas law, toxic tort plaintiffs must...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Sixth Circuit Applies FRE 702 to Class Certification Experts and Highlights Commonality and Predominance Issues for Products That...

Class certification decisions under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mark a critical stage in any putative class action lawsuit. Rule 23(a) requires plaintiffs to prove, among other things, that “there are...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

To Depose or Not to Depose: When Challenging Opposing Nonretained Experts Becomes Challenging

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) requires parties to disclose the opinions of experts who may present evidence at trial. If the disclosures are inadequate, Rule 37(c) requires exclusion of the opinions “unless the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Same Song, Different Verse — Causation Experts for Second Group of Bellwether Plaintiffs Excluded for Same Reason as First Group’s...

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Fifth Circuit Asks the Right Questions, Affirms Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Herbicide Claims as Untimely and Lacking...

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

Goldberg Segalla

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to Exclude Defendants’ Expert Denied

Goldberg Segalla on

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

Goldberg Segalla

Multiple Motions Granted in Part for Summary Judgment and to Strike Evidence

Goldberg Segalla on

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

Goldberg Segalla

Plaintiffs’ Appeal to Reverse Defendants’ Daubert Motion In Limine was Granted

Goldberg Segalla on

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

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Expert Need Not Have Acquired the Requisite Skill Level Prior to the Time of the Invention

WilmerHale on

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

Rumberger | Kirk

No Sea Changes to See Here in 2023 Amendment to Rule 702

Rumberger | Kirk on

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

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

What Have We Learned From the First Six Months Under the New Federal Rule of Evidence 702?

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

Kilpatrick

Eighth Circuit concludes that admissibility at class certification is a “red-herring”

Kilpatrick on

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Plaintiffs’ Second Bite at the General Causation Apple Fares No Better Than the First in Acetaminophen MDL

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

160 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 7

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide