By Eric Schweibenz
On March 12, 2012, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version of Order No. 21 (dated February 28, 2012) denying Respondent Samsung LED Co., Ltd’s (“Samsung”) motion to disqualify Complainant OSRAM AG’s (“OSRAM”) expert witness and bar his access to confidential information in Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-785).

According to the Order, Samsung’s motion was based on, inter alia, OSRAM’s expert’s involvement with “RPI’s Lighting Research Center, of which OSRAM is a member,” and the expert’s “consulting and professional relationship with OSRAM and RPI’s Partners Program.”  OSRAM responded that Samsung’s argument was “purely speculative.”

Having reviewed the parties’ submissions, ALJ Pender denied the motion.  The ALJ concluded that Samsung failed to provide sufficient evidence that OSRAM’s expert should be disqualified on the grounds that he has access to Samsung confidential information under the Samsung-RPI research agreements, and that Samsung failed to provide any direct evidence of the expert’s current ties to OSRAM other than his role as OSRAM’s expert witness in the investigation.