QVC, INC. v. MJC AMERICA, LTD.

Filing 74

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT QVC'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN OPINION TESTIMONY OF SOLEUS' EXPERT HARRY EHRLICH IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. SIGNED BY HONORABLE THOMAS N. ONEILL, JR ON 1/4/12. 1/4/12 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(fdc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
QVC, INC.
v.
MJC AMERICA, LTD.
d/b/a SOLEUS INTERNATIONAL, INC.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 08-3830

ORDER
AND NOW, this 4th day of January, 2012, upon consideration of QVC’s motion to
exclude certain opinion testimony of Soleus’ expert Harry Ehrlich and Soleus’ response to the
QVC’s motion, and consistent with the accompanying memorandum of law, it is ORDERED that
QVC’s motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
(1)

QVC’s motion is DENIED to the extent that QVC seeks preclude in its
entirety Ehrlich’s testimony with respect to the recall of the heaters.
Consistent with the accompanying memorandum of law, Ehrlich may
testify with respect to the design flaws, crimping errors and their
implications for subsequent product defect investigations.

(1)

QVC’s motion is GRANTED:
(a)

to the extent that QVC seeks to preclude Ehrlich’s opinion
as to whether QVC’s decision to recall all of the Heaters as
defective was supported from a quality control perspective;

(b)

to the extent that QVC seeks to preclude Ehrlich’s
conclusions that QVC’s recall decision had no basis, was
arbitrary, not justified, or not substantiated or that QVC

lacked a right to issue a recall;
(c)

to the extent that QVC seeks to preclude Ehrlich’s
testimony as to his conclusion that “QVC’s letters to the
CPSC confirm that their recall does not comport with the
CPSC’s requirements for a product safety recall”; and

(d)

to the extent that it seeks to exclude opinions from Ehrlich
that purport to be based on statistical analysis.

s/Thomas N. O’Neill, Jr.
THOMAS N. O’NEILL, JR., J.

-2-