News & Analysis as of

Daubert Standards Evidence

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

Rumberger | Kirk

New AI Rule, Old Standard: Proposed Federal Rule of Evidence 707 Aims to Apply Daubert Standard to AI-Generated Evidence

Rumberger | Kirk on

In response to the rapidly increasing presence of AI-generated outputs in litigation, on June 10, 2025, the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules approved for publication for public comment a...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

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

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

A Looming En Banc Decision with Potentially Damaging Consequences – EcoFactor v. Google

For anyone following the evolving admissibility standards for expert opinions relating to patent damages, the EcoFactor v. Google case is one to watch. In December 2024, the Federal Circuit granted Google’s petition for...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

Carlton Fields

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of January 20-24, 2025

Carlton Fields on

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - Isaac Indus v. PDVSA - personal jurisdiction, foreign sovereign immunity, breach of contract - USA v. Schwarzbaum - foreign bank accounts, IRS form FBAR, penalties, Excessive...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

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

Can a Treating Physician’s Medical Testimony Be “Lay Opinion”? Divided Sixth Circuit Panel Disagrees on Where to Draw the Line

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

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

Goodwin

Opening the Black Box of Generative AI: Explainability in Bankruptcy Cases

Goodwin on

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

California Supreme Court Walks Middle Ground on Warnings Causation but Reaffirms Learned Intermediary Doctrine in Himes

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Northern District of Illinois Holds that Seventh Circuit Precedent is Incompatible with Rule 702 as Amended

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Expert’s Results-Driven Methodology Leads to Exclusion and Summary Judgment in Paraquat MDL

An expert witness is not supposed to pick a desired result and then reverse engineer inputs and methods that reach that result. As the Ninth Circuit observed 30 years ago, “[c]oming to a firm conclusion first and then doing...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Blockchain Analysis and Related Expert Testimony Admissible In Criminal Trial

Ballard Spahr LLP on

It is challenging for law enforcement to track down and trace illicit activities conducted through digital currencies. The process can be very time- and resource-intensive. Further, securing charges and arrests, and...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Old Habits Die Hard: First Circuit Cites Newly Amended Language of FRE 702 But Follows Abrogated Precedent Instead

The longer and more frequently a principle is repeated by the courts, the more difficult it can be for courts to acknowledge change. As illustrated by the First Circuit’s opinion in Rodriguez v. Hospital San Cristobal, Inc.,...more

Butler Snow LLP

Rule 104(c)(3): When Justice So Requires

Butler Snow LLP on

The following is an article of fiction. The author simply has a well-developed imagination. He should have won summary judgment. And he had – on all claims save one. But one was enough. And now he found himself in...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Something to Celebrate: A Brief Guide to the FRE 702 Amendments

Fun fact: There are 23 holidays that can be celebrated today, December 1st. Some, like Rosa Parks Day and World AIDS Day, are solemn and serious. Others are silly and fun, like National Peppermint Bark Day and National...more

IMS Legal Strategies

Working with Experts Under the New 702 Rule

IMS Legal Strategies on

On June 7, 2022, the Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure approved amendments to several of the Federal Rules of Evidence—including Rule 702, which governs the admissibility of expert witness...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Cyntec Company, Ltd. v. Chilisin Electronics Corp., Chilisin America Ltd. Nos. 2022-1873, (Fed. Cir. October 16, 2023)

This case is primarily about the Daubert standard as applied to expert testimony on damages. The Federal Circuit reversed the Northern District of California’s admission of expert testimony on damages, which relied on...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Experts Who Cannot Articulate a Standard Cannot Opine that a Defendant Failed to Meet the Standard

If you don’t know where a line is, you can’t say whether someone has crossed it. That principle applies in spades to expert witnesses, particularly when their role in the case calls on them to help the jury understand where...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Courts Are Citing the Rule 702 Amendments – And Litigants Should, Too

Though the pending amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 have not taken effect officially yet, courts already have begun to cite them. Early signs indicate the potential that, consistent with the comments by the Advisory...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Court Allows Expert Testimony Regarding Measured Mile Analysis Comparing Work on Different Projects

Loss of productivity damages are commonly estimated using a “measured mile” analysis, which compares unimpacted construction work to work which has been disrupted to determine the cost impact of the disruption. Such analyses...more

100 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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