Independent materials-science expertise for product liability, IP and technical disputes.
Start with a conflict check. Send the party names and the technical subject matter only. Do not send case details, documents, samples or privileged material before an engagement agreement is in place.
The engagement is to reach the conclusion the evidence supports. An opinion that bends to the retaining party is worth nothing under cross-examination, and counsel is better served by knowing early where the technical weaknesses are than by discovering them in deposition.
Investigations run from inception through to litigation-related expert testimony. Where the product under evaluation cannot be assessed with standard equipment, custom test equipment can be acquired or built to suit it — which is often what produces the measurement that actually decides an infringement or a causation question.
Analysis is commissioned through an established network of university and industry laboratory partners, with government national laboratories available through collaborators where a specialised resource is required. Not being tied to a single in-house laboratory means the method is chosen for the question rather than for the equipment already owned.
Molecular degradation, environmental stress cracking and fibre debonding decide cases, and they have to be explained to people with no technical background without being distorted in the process. Four decades of teaching graduate and undergraduate engineering, and of presenting technical findings to boards and non-specialist audiences, is directly applicable here.
The full record, including awards and appointments, is set out on the credentials page.
Yes. Opinions follow the evidence. A practice that only works for one side is an advocate, not an expert — and a competent opposing counsel will establish that quickly.
PhD in polymer science and engineering (University of Manchester); forty years of materials science and engineering experience across industry and academia; Chartered Engineer (CEng) and Chartered Scientist (CSci); Fellow of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (FIMMM); Fellow of the Nigerian Academy of Engineering (FAEng); seven patents and 150-plus refereed publications. Curriculum vitae available on request.
As early as possible — ideally before discovery closes. Early retention allows input on what documents and physical evidence to request, what testing to specify, and what questions the opposing expert is likely to raise.
Federal and state courts. Familiar with both Daubert and Frye admissibility standards. Details are in the curriculum vitae.
A short conversation is usually enough to tell whether independent technical review is worth it — and if it is not, you will be told so.
Describe what is happening, what it is costing and what decision is waiting on it. You will get a direct assessment of whether and how this can be investigated.
Discuss Your ChallengeSend the parties and the technical subject matter only — no case details, no documents. Conflicts are cleared before any substantive discussion takes place.
Request a Conflict Check