3
Shared Docs
1
Same-Page
4 / 3
Mentions
d States v. Stroming, 838 F. App'x 624 (2d Cir. 2021) (summary order) 15 United States v. Thomas, 116 F.3d 606 (2d Cir. 1997) 15 United States v. Valle, No. 12 Cr. 847 (PGG), 2013 WL 440687 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2013) 3 United States v. Washington, 705 F.2d 489 (D.C. Cir. 1983) 16 United States v. We
mony is simply an attempt to invade the province of the jury by putting a thumb on the scale in their assessment of witness credibility.6 See, e.g., Nimely, 414 F.3d at 398 ("[E]xpert opinions that constitute evaluations of witness credibility, even when such evaluations are rooted in scientific or tec
general topics about which the expert will testify is insufficient; rather, the summary must reveal the expert's actual opinions." United States v. Valle, No. 12 Cr. 847 (PGG), 2013 WL 440687, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2013); see Ulbricht, 858 F.3d at 115 (calling "plainly inadequate" a disclosure that
Page: EFTA00024957 →roposed expert testimony is reliable, and (3) the proposed testimony is relevant. See Dauber! v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 592 (1993); Nimely v. City of New York, 414 F.3d 381, 396 n.11 (2d Cir. 2005). "Expert testimony which does not relate to any issue in the case is not relevant and, e
Page: EFTA00024958 →res his opinions have no apparent relevance, and because even the current disclosures are vague yet disclosed relatively close to trial. See, e.g., Valle, 2013 WL 440687, at *6 (ordering rapid supplemental disclosure). 15 EFTA00024970 --- PAGE BREAK --- If Dr. Hall had some admissible substantive
Page: EFTA00024971 →t v. Merrell Dow Phanns., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 593-94 (1993)). But Rule 702 ultimately sets a "liberal" and "permissive" standard of admissibility. Nimely v. City of New York, 414 F.3d 381, 395-96 (2d Cir. 2005). In particular, not every expert admissible under Daubert need rely on a method that confor
Page: EFTA00014702 →" and "describe the bases for the experts' opinions." United States v. Ulbricht, 858 F.3d 71, 115 (2d Cir. 2017) (emphasis added); United States v. Valle, No. 12-CR-847 (PGG), 2013 WL 440687, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2013) ("Merely identifying the general topics about which the expert will testify is i
Page: EFTA00014703 →Entities connected to both Valle and Nimely

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
Bloomberg L.P.
ORGANIZATION
Prince Andrew
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSON
Paul Ryan
PERSONDaubert
PERSON
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON
Russell Simmons
PERSON
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATIONLisa Rocchio
PERSONUlbricht
PERSON
Harvey Weinstein
PERSONRomero
PERSONPark Dietz
PERSON
Ryan Hall
PERSONSecond Circuit
ORGANIZATIONLoftus
PERSONE.E.O.C. v. Bloomberg L.P.
ORGANIZATION