Osckel et al v. Pardee et al
Filing
103
ORDER Denying 97 Motion to Strike New Prime's Designated Expert Witness, Dr. Glenn S. Lipson's January 16, 2013 Report. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 1/29/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
EDWARD OSKEL, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
RANDY JAMES PARDEE, et al.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_________________________________________ )
18
Designated Expert Witness Report (#97). The Court has considered the Plaintiff’s Motion (#97), the
Defendants’ Response (#99), and the Plaintiff’s Reply (#101).
DISCUSSION
19
The Plaintiff asserts that New Prime’s Expert Witness Dr. Glenn Lipson’s January 16, 2013,
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion to Strike New Prime’s
16
17
2:11-cv-154-GMN-NJK
Report should be stricken for failure to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B) and Daubert.
Concerning Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B), the Plaintiff asserts that Dr. Lipson failed to identify all the
facts and data he relied upon in forming his opinion. This is incorrect. The Court has reviewed Dr.
Lipson’s report and it clearly states which records he reviewed. As for the Daubert argument, the
Court finds that a Daubert dispute is more appropriately reserved for a motion in limine and other
pre-trial matters, not an emergency discovery dispute. Accordingly, the Emergency Motion to Strike
is denied. The deposition of Dr. Glenn Lipson shall proceed as scheduled.
...
1
CONCLUSION
2
Based on the foregoing, and good cause appearing therefore,
3
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion to Strike New Prime’s
4
Designated Expert Witness; Report (#97) is DENIED.
5
DATED this 29th day of January, 2013.
6
7
8
9
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?