Skip to main content
Ninth Circuit· 11/5/2020

United States v. Patrick Bacon

Citations

  • 979 F.3d 766

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “Defendants are correct that the expert testimony 15 using the legally significant terms ‘deliberate indifference’ and ‘objective reasonableness’ 16 should be excluded.”
  • “There is considerable force behind both the argument that requiring retrial promotes Daubert’s gatekeeping function and the argument that requiring retrial can waste judicial resources and unnecessarily treats Daubert errors differently from other evidentiary errors.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named United States v. Patrick Bacon

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.