AEM v North Dakota – AEM Opposition to Motion to Strike Experts

Case 1:17-cv-00151-DLH-CSM 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA 

AEM vs North Dakota

Document 122 Filed 02/28/19 Page 1 of 22

THE MANUFACTURERS’ OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE THE MANUFACTURERS’ EXPERT OPINIONS 

CONCLUSION The State and NDIDA retained Edward Stockton and Michael Krush to rebut the opinions of the Manufacturers’ experts. Both of these experts, however, ultimately conceded the validity of the opinions of Professors Leininger and Lafontaine cited by the Manufacturers. (SUMF ¶¶ 29, 32, 39, 40). These undisputed expert opinions buttress the other undisputed material facts on which the Manufacturers have sought summary judgment while opposing the motions for partial summary judgment filed by the State and NDIDA. The fact that the State and NDIDA were unable to find any experts to support their view of the evidence is not a legitimate basis for excluding the opinions of the Manufacturers’ experts on summary judgment in a case that is otherwise scheduled for a bench trial. The Manufacturers’ experts are leaders in their fields with decades of relevant experience. (SUMF ¶¶ 27, 28). Their opinions are factual in nature and are designed to assist this Court in resolving questions of law. The Federal Rules of Evidence cited by the State and NDIDA do not warrant exclusion. Accordingly, the Manufacturers respectfully request that the Court deny in its entirety Defendants’ Motion to Strike the Manufacturers’ Expert Opinions