- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Childhood Sexual Abuse Litigation
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Ediscovery
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Restructuring and Business Bankruptcy
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
- Litigation Support Services
-
December 4, 2019State of Minnesota Sues JUUL
-
November 26, 2019Minnesota Lawyer Honors Two Robins Kaplan Attorneys as 2019 Attorneys of the Year
-
November 21, 2019Firm, Attorney Stacey Slaughter Recognized by National Law Journal
-
December 13, 2019Bridgeport 2019 Wage & Hour Litigation & Management Conference
-
January 10, 2020Bridgeport 2020 Consumer Class Action Litigation Conference
-
January 15-17, 2020Loss Executives Association 89th Annual Meeting and Mid-Winter Educational Program
-
November 2019CLASS ACTION: Experts weigh in on significant class action developments
-
November 15, 20192019 Case Developments: Are Massachusetts Insurers Required To Be Perfect In An Imperfect World?
-
November 15, 2019Artificial Intelligence v. General Data Protection Regulation: Complex Risks in Changing Times
When ITC Excludes Later-Filed Expert Testimony
A pair of recent decisions out of the U.S. International Trade Commission illustrate the potential importance of the consistency of early expert disclosures in an investigation.
September 26, 2018
Law360, (September 26, 2018, 2:35 PM EDT) -- A pair of recent decisions out of the U.S. International Trade Commission illustrate the potential importance of the consistency of early expert disclosures in an investigation. In the recent decisions, the administrative law judge ruled on the admissibility of opinions included in later-filed expert witness statements prepared for an evidentiary hearing. Under the ALJ’s ground rules, “[a]n expert’s testimony at the trial shall be limited in accordance with the scope of his or her expert report(s), deposition testimony, or within the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge.” The ALJ’s interpretation of this ground rule may inform how ALJs may interpret similar rules in their own investigations.
All Content © 2018, Portfolio Media, Inc.
The articles on our Website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice.
Related Professionals
Bryan J. Vogel
Partner
Derrick J. Carman
Associate
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.