Timothy J. Rizzo v. Applied Materials, Inc., et al.

US Supreme Court held historical case law such as Joiner, Matrixx, Daubert, Kumho Tire. .etc, based upon . scientific / technical evidence within a Daubert Court, protecting the vested interest of Rizzo to assure that Courts are not "heavy handed" or "abuse of discretion" by the gatekeeper violating the constitutional right to trial by a jury of peers. Whether the courts below erroneously abused their discretion dismissing Rizzo's Experts (Dr. Wang, Dr. Miloslaysky, Dr. Hodgman) in conflict with the decisions of multiple circuits (MDL) even the Second Circuit's past rulings, where experts and scientific knowledge factsof the case usurp the jury's right to decide the - facts conflicting with Daubert upon scientific controversy overstepping the function of the gatekeeper. Where epidemiology and peer review was substantial and opinions derived from Rizzo's clinical picture, while claiming the case is of ipse dixit though the science challenges the rulings from the courts below supporting Daubert. The rulings are contradictive to the science and unconstitutionally interferes with Rizzo's right to have his claims heard by a jury of peers as required by the Seventh Amendment.' Whether the courts below erroneously held a different standard of review for Daubert and 1. Breyer, "Introduction," 4, and Metzger, "The Demise of Daubert in State Courts."