Interference No. 103,303
Before considering issues (1) and (2), we must first
consider the motions to suppress since they affect the
evidence to be considered by us.
The Galimberti et al. motion to suppress seeks to
suppress each of the Asanuma six declarations, including the
translator's declaration, and the testimony of Dr. Asanuma on
the grounds of hearsay and lack of foundation. The motion
contends that Dr. Asanuma's testimony concerning the repeats
of Asanuma Example 3 shows a lack of personal knowledge
concerning the experimental work, because the experimental
work was done out by Messrs. Ishii and Sunaga, who were not
called to testify. The motion is denied for the reasons set4
forth in Asanuma et al.'s opposition (Paper No. 74).
We agree with the party Asanuma et al. that Dr. Asanuma's
testimony is that of an expert witness and is admissible under
Fed. R. Evid. 702. Moreover, the underlying facts presented
by Dr. Asanuma are admissible in this interference under the
rule of reason, since Dr. Asanuma is the supervisor of Messrs.
4The objection raised here would also be applicable to
the testimony of Dr. Galimberti who testified about analyses
performed by other persons who were not called to testify.
See pages 6 and 7 of the opposition.
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007