Munoz, et al. vs. PHH Mortgage Corp., et al.

Filing 574

ORDER signed by Judge M Miller Baker on 12/7/2023. Supplemental Briefs due within 14 days. (Xiong, J.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EFRAIN MUNOZ, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,

No. 1:08-cv-00759-MMB-BAM
ORDER

v.
PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION,
et al.,
Defendants.

15

The parties have filed dueling motions to exclude expert testimony or

16

portions thereof. See ECF 570 (Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude Madigan); ECF 571

17

(Defendants’ motion to exclude Hoyt). A major theme of Plaintiffs’ opposition

18

to Defendants’ motion to exclude is that matters regarding the facts or under-

19

lying assumptions on which an expert witness bases his opinion are properly

20

the subject of cross-examination and go to the weight, not the admissibility, of

21

the expert’s testimony. See, e.g., ECF 572, at 11, 13, 14.

22

An amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 took effect on December

23

1, 2023. 1 The Advisory Committee’s Note states that “many courts have held

24

that the critical questions of the sufficiency of any expert’s basis, and the ap-

25

plication of the expert’s methodology, are questions of weight and not

1

See https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2023_congressional_package_april_24_2023_0.pdf.

1

admissibility. These rulings are an incorrect application of Rules 702 and

2

104(a).” Fed. R. Evid. 702 Adv. Comm. Note (2023).

3

The court directs the parties to address the significance—if any—of the

4

2023 amendment to Rule 702 as it relates to the pending motions to exclude.

5

Within 14 days of the date of this order, the parties shall submit supplemental

6

briefs on that question, not to exceed 3,000 words per side.

7
8

Dated: December 7, 2023

2

/s/ M. Miller Baker
M. Miller Baker, Judge 2

Judge of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.

2