Showing results 1-3 of 3.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"An order directing the parties in a manner consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is separately and contemporaneously issued this 27 day of June, 2002."

  Khairkhwa v. Obama - Dist. of Columbia Circuit

Decided: 5/27/2011

In considering whether this standard is met, courts may consider the factors articulated in Daubert, such as (1) whether the expert's technique or theory can be or has been tested; (2) whether the technique or theory has been subject to peer review and publication; (3) the known or potential rate of error of the technique or theory when applied; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards and controls; and (5) whether the technique or theory has been generally accepted in the scientific community. ... As the Supreme Court stated in Daubert, the trial court must determine whether the proposed expert possesses "a reliable basis in the 11*11 knowledge and experience of [the relevant] discipline."

Cited 13 times

  CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION v. Export-Import Bank - Dist. of Columbia Circuit

Decided: 1/21/2015

Cf. Parsi v. Daioleslam, 852 F.Supp.2d 82, 89 (D.D.C. 2012) (explaining that the court was unable to understand how plaintiff's expert could "opine on whether defendant's writings were properly substantiated," without first "investigating defendant's source materials in any systematic way," and finding that "the `facts and data' [the expert] relied on were patently insufficient for the task he was given"); ... 219*219 Rule 702, which governs the use of expert testimony, provides that a qualified expert may testify to assist the trier of fact "if the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data," "the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods," and "the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case."

Cited 0 times

  CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTIION NETWORK v. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF US - Dist. of Columbia Circuit

Decided: 1/21/2015

Cf. Parsi v. Daioleslam, 852 F. Supp. 2d 82, 89 (D.D.C. 2012) (explaining that the court was unable to understand how plaintiff's expert could "opine on whether defendant's writings were properly substantiated," without first "investigating defendant's source materials in any systematic way," and finding that "the `facts and data' [the expert] relied on were patently insufficient for the task he was given"); ... Rule 702, which governs the use of expert testimony, provides that a qualified expert may testify to assist the trier of fact "if the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data," "the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods," and "the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case."

Cited 0 times