This consolidated action concerns damage to two separate cargos of medical imaging devices shipped by air from the United States to China. The cargo at issue in the first-filed action was an MRI machine, while the cargo at issue in the later-filed action consisted of two CT scanners.
Plaintiffs Indemnity Insurance Company of North America and Huatai Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Ltd. filed a motion to exclude the opinion testimony of Defendant Expeditors International of Washington, Inc.’s expert David Stopak.
Stopak opined that the cargo was inadequately packaged before it was tendered to Expeditors.
Packaging Expert Witness
David Stopak is a seasoned specialist in the packaging for international transport of sensitive medical devices, and has actually performed such packaging work for Plaintiffs’ subrogor, GE Medical.
He is a Graduate of DeVry Institute of Technology, graduating in 1985 with a degree in Electronic Engineer Technology (EET). Stopak is the President of A. Imaging Solutions, Inc., a privately-owned corporation that markets and supplies new and pre-owned radiology equipment to the medical community and provides regional service coverage. He has been in the business since 1992 and has a profound understanding of pre-owned and new medical equipment of all modalities.
Discussion by the Court
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 obligates a district court to “ensure that an expert’s testimony both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand.”
The Court found that the motion to exclude presented arguments going to the weight that Stopak’s testimony should be given, rather than its admissibility, and the Court will have an opportunity to consider those arguments at the bench trial.
Accordingly, the Court denied the Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude, without prejudice to their ability to challenge Stopak’s testimony at trial.
Held
The Court denied the Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude the testimony of David Stopak.
Key Takeaway
Where, as here, the case will proceed to a bench trial rather than a jury trial, the Court’s “gatekeeping function” is less critical, because the Court “can make its own credibility determinations about expert testimony in the full context of trial and accord the testimony the weight it warrants.”
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Indemnity Insurance Company Of North America V. Expeditors International Of Washington Inc. |
| Docket Number: | 2:23cv507 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Washington Western |
| Order Date: | January 16, 2026 |
Leave a Reply