Lindland

Lindland v. TuSimple, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 20, 20223:21-cv-00417California2,176 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOHN LINDLAND, Case No.: 3:21-cv-00417-RBM-MDD

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF

v. JOHN LINDLAND’S MOTION TO

EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF

TUSIMPLE, INC., et al.,

DEFENDANT’S EXPERT WITNESS

Defendants. RICHARD HOLSTROM

16 [Doc. 32] 17 On March 24, 2022, Plaintiff John Lindland (“Plaintiff”) filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Defendant TuSimple, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) expert witness Richard Holstrom under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (“Motion”). (Doc. 32 (hereinafter “Mot.”).) Defendant filed a brief in opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion on April 21, 2022 (Doc. 44 (hereinafter “Opp.”)), and Plaintiff filed his reply on April 28, 2022. (Doc. 45.) For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff’s Motion is DENIED. I. BACKGROUND The Court thoroughly recounted the factual and procedural background of this action in its orders on Defendant’s motion for order…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.