This decision addresses the admissibility of two expert reports submitted by the plaintiff in a proposed class action certification motion.
The defendants sought to strike the reports, arguing lack of objectivity and improper scope.
The court ruled that the report from an investor in the defendant company was inadmissible due to a direct economic conflict of interest, despite the expert's disclosure and offer to opt out of class compensation.
The report from a lawyer specializing in securities and corporate law was deemed admissible, as it provided necessary and helpful expertise on complex regulatory standards, but its concluding paragraphs opining on the ultimate issue of misrepresentation were ordered redacted as they usurped the court's role.
