Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Stephen Wendell, et al.

The admissibility of expert testimony is governed by Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Rule 702 provides that “[a] witness who is qualified as an expert . . . may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if,” among other things, “the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods” and “the testimony has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.” Fed. R. Evid. 702(c), (d) (emphasis added). This Court has held that a district court’s application of Rule 702 is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Gen. Elec. Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 143 (1997). The questions presented are as follows:

1. Whether the two-part standard of reviewing expert-admissibility rulings employed by the Ninth Circuit, along with the Third and Seventh Circuits, improperly empowers these courts to reverse district court decisions to exclude evidence without “the deference that is the hallmark of abuse-of-discretion review.” Joiner, 522 U.S. at 143.

2. Whether an expert’s qualifications and mere invocation of a scientific methodology can be sufficient to require admission of his testimony, as the Ninth Circuit concluded, or whether Rule 702 requires that a witness, no matter how qualified, must also satisfy the court that his methodology was “reliably applied to the facts of the case,” as several other circuits have held.