“As the court warned the parties nearly a year ago, Daubert only allows challenges to an expert’s methodology,” the judge wrote. “The defendants’ motion overlooks that … as a general rule … ‘[t]he fact that an expert’s testimony contains some vulnerable assumptions does not make the testimony irrelevant or inadmissible.’”
“As the court warned the parties nearly a year ago, Daubert only allows challenges to an expert’s methodology,” the judge wrote. “The defendants’ motion overlooks that … as a general rule … ‘[t]he fact that an expert’s testimony contains some vulnerable assumptions does not make the testimony irrelevant or inadmissible.’”
