By: Alex Li and Ryan McCrum – In a recently
issued order, ALJ Lord granted-in-part and denied-in-part
Respondents' motion in limine to exclude certain
testimony of Complainants' expert. Certain Radio Frequency
Microneedle Dermatological Treatment Devices and Components
Thereof, Inv. 337-TA-1112, Order No. 30 (May 1, 2019). We have
previously reported on this investigation in connection with the
application of the Daubert standard at the ITC (here).
In their motion in limine, Respondents argued that
significant portions of Complainants' expert testimony should
be excluded because his testimony was based on an incorrect legal
standard; his opinions were not supported by any reliable evidence
or rigorous scientific method; he had relied on hearsay; and that
some of his testimony was neither disclosed during discovery or in
his expert reports.