What you've written here doesn't seem to relate to anything I have previously written. Was it somebody else's comments. I have not posted on Daubert qualifications nor pre-trial events. My comments were about the published opinion of the 11th Circuit Court.

The fact that they mentioned the Daubert issue is curious. It is not a matter of law but part of the merits of the case. The 11th Circuit cannot  (because of the 7th amendment) rule on the merits of the case. This alone gives good reason to appeal to the Supreme Court. The only question before them was whether "economic justification" was a proper part of the jury instructions and whether Strom was correct in declaring that insufficient evidence was presented by the plaintiff on that point.

The 11th Circuits opinion went way beyond that. In the tradition of LIBERALS, they brought in issues of the merits of the case and even Domina's opening remarks. Those are entirely irrelevant as issues of law.

Their entire opinion REEKS with a LIBERAL judicial philosophy.

I have noted that you have twice ignored my remarks about Scalia reviewing this case. Having heard him explain how he approaches a decision, I have little doubt that he would make toast of the 11th Circuit opinion.