Opinion ID: 774843
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Daubert Standard

Text: 26 Scientific evidence is admitted pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 587-89 (1993) (Daubert I), the Supreme Court held that Rule 702 displaced the prior general acceptance test. Under Daubert II, the district court acts as a gatekeeper, excluding bad science that does not carry sufficient indicia of reliability for admission under Rule 702. 43 F.3d at 1316. This is accomplished through a preliminary determination that the proffered evidence is both relevant and reliable. 12 Daubert I, 509 U.S. at 589-92. 27 Scientific evidence is reliable if it is based on an assertion that is grounded in methods of science -the focus is on principles and methodology, not conclusions. Id. at 595-96. The Supreme Court listed four non-exclusive factors for consideration in the reliability analysis: (1) whether the scientific theory or technique can be (and has been) tested; (2) whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) whether a particular technique has a known potential rate of error; and (4) whether the theory or technique is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community. Id. at 593-94. 28 In Daubert II we noted that a very significant fact to be considered is whether the experts are proposing to testify about matters growing naturally and directly out of research they have conducted independent of the litigation, or whether they have developed their opinions expressly for purposes of testifying. 43 F.3d at 1317. If the evidence is not based upon independent research, the district court must determine whether there exists any other objective, verifiable evidence that the testimony is based on scientifically valid principles. Id. at 1317-18 (internal quotation marks omitted). Peer review is the chief way of satisfying this requirement, though it may also be met by 29 precisely [explaining] how [the experts ] went about reaching their conclusions and point[ing] to some objective source -a learned treatise, the policy statement of a professional association, a published article in a reputable scientific journal or the like -to show that they have followed the scientific method, as it is practiced by (at least) a recognized minority of scientists in their field. 30 Id. at 1318-19 (citing United States v. Rincon, 28 F.3d 921, 924 (9th Cir. 1994)).