LCJ Amicus Brief in Jensen v. Camco Manufacturing LLC, US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit

LCJ is urging the Ninth Circuit to uphold Judge David Campbell’s (D. Arizona) decision that an expert’s “differential etiology” assessment did not satisfy FRE 702(c) or 702(d) when employed to identify a subject fire’s cause. (This type of analysis begins by “ruling in” all possible causes and then winnowing down these possibilities to the extent case-specific circumstances allow, to find one causal agent that cannot be ruled out.) Although district court decisions in the 9th Circuit have been inconsistent in fulfilling the gatekeeping function, in Jensen, the district court correctly employed Rule 702’s admissibility criteria to evaluate and ultimately exclude the proffered opinion testimony. LCJ’s amicus brief, prepared by Lee Mickus of Evans Fears Schuttert McNulty Mickus, urges the 9th Circuit to use this decision correctly applying Rule 702 to issue guidance to district courts explaining that judges must fulfill their gatekeeping responsibility in accordance with Rule 702’s explicit directives.

Please click here to read the amicus brief.