United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
IN RE TAXOTERE (DOCETAXEL) PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION This document relates to Barbara Earnest, 16-17144
ORDER AND REASONS
TRICHE MILAZZO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
the Court is the Sanofi Defendants' Motion to Exclude
Expert Testimony of Dr. Linda Bosserman (Doc. 6130). The
Court heard oral argument on May 22, 2019. For the following
reasons, the Motion is GRANTED IN PART.
in this multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) are
suing several pharmaceutical companies that manufactured
and/or distributed a chemotherapy drug, Taxotere or
docetaxel,  that Plaintiffs were administered for the
treatment of breast cancer. Plaintiffs allege that the drug
caused permanent alopecia-in other words, permanent hair
loss. Plaintiffs bring claims of failure to warn, negligent
misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation, and more.
first bellwether trial of Plaintiff, Barbara Earnest, is set
to begin September 16, 2019. At trial, Plaintiff intends to
introduce the expert testimony of Dr. Linda Bosserman. Dr.
Bosserman is a board-certified specialist in internal
medicine and oncology. She has worked with hundreds if not
thousands of newly diagnosed breast cancer
patients. The Sanofi Defendants have filed the
instant Motion seeking to exclude Dr. Bosserman's opinion
on how the medical community's informed consent standards
apply to the facts of Earnest's case.
admissibility of expert testimony is governed by Federal Rule
of Evidence 702, which provides as follows:
witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill,
experience, training, or education may testify in the form of
an opinion or otherwise if:
(a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other
specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to
understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and
(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and
methods to the facts of the case.
current version of Rule 702 reflects the Supreme Court's
decisions in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms.,
Inc. and Kumho Tire Co. v.
Carmichael. The threshold inquiry in determining
whether an individual may offer expert testimony under Rule
702 is whether the individual has the requisite
qualifications. After defining the permissible scope of
the expert's testimony, a court next assesses whether the
opinions are reliable and relevant. As ...