DOJ-OGR-00008047.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document507 Filed 11/24/21 Page6of28 Court “must consider whether an expert’s proposed testimony would usurp the province of the judge to instruct on the law, or of the jury to make factual determinations.” Island Intell. Prop. LLC v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 09 Civ. 2675 (KBF), 2012 WL 526722, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2012) (citations omitted). Il. THE COURT SHOULD PRECLUDE THE TESTIMONY OF DR. RYAN HALL Dr. Ryan Hall is a psychiatrist who frequently testifies as an expert witness. | provided by the defendant, Dr. Hall “will offer the opinions and diagnoses contained in his report, the bases for those opinions, and the significance of the diagnoses and opinions.” (Ex. A, This Court should exclude Dr. Hall’s testimony. As disclosed, his expert opinions a a have no relevance, because none bears on the facts of this case or Minor Victim-4’s credibility. Any basis for those opinions is therefore also irrelevant. Similarly, absent some as- yet-undisclosed relevance, the “significance” of Dr. Hall’s opinions iii have no bearing here: Because none of those opinions bear on the facts of this case or a witness’s credibility, their PO Dr. Hall’s proffered fact testimony should also be * The Government has attached, and moves to file, the same redacted version of the defendant’s expert notice attached to its previous filings (See Dkt. Nos. 418 and 424). 4 DOJ-OGR-00008047