Selected Projects

The Miami office of Exponent has been involved in numerous failure analyses in civil, criminal, and commercial investigations of significant importance both locally and nationwide. Summaries of a few representative investigations are provided below.

Ramos v. Biomet (Intellectual Property Dispute)
Miami surgeon Dr. Pedro Ramos obtained a United States Patent on an improved artificial hip joint he had invented. Several major manufacturers rejected Dr. Ramos' offers to license his patent, indicating that they were pursuing alternative designs. A few years later at a medical convention, Dr. Ramos was surprised to find those same manufacturers selling artificial hips that used his patented ideas. Our engineers were retained by the attorneys for Dr. Ramos to examine the alleged infringing devices, review the patent and relevant references, and develop an opinion as to whether or not infringement had occurred. We testified with regard to our analysis at a bench trial in U.S. District Court in Miami. The judge found that Biomet had willfully infringed Dr. Ramos' patent, and awarded treble damages of $6,000,000.

Intermarine USA v. United States Navy (Cost Recovery Dispute)
Intermarine USA, a contractor producing Mine Sweepers for the U.S. Navy, was seeking recovery of cost overruns that Intermarine attributed to the Navy's specification of Italian Issota-Fraschini non-magnetic diesel engines for the subject ship. Although Exponent had provided support to the U.S. Navy with regard to investigating diesel engines used for ship propulsion, we received a waiver allowing us to work on Intermarine's behalf. Our engineers reviewed the history of engine development, focusing on the intrinsic similarities and differences among the six- and eight-cylinder versions of this engine. Shortly after we were deposed by a U.S. Justice Department Attorney, the Navy capitulated and paid $40,000,000 in added costs to Exponent's client.

Urbina v. Firestone (Product Liability)
Mr. Urbina took his Lincoln Continental to the local Firestone dealer in Beaumont, Texas to have his brakes checked. Following that work, he drove the vehicle almost 4,000 miles until he was fatally injured in an accident when one of his wheels came off while driving on a freeway. His surviving children sued Firestone, in spite of the industry consensus that if an error is made installing a wheel, it is almost always manifested in 5 to 25 miles. Our investigation included engineering analysis of the behavior of bolted joints under variable fatigue conditions, and practical tests of behavior of the wheel lugs and nuts. One of the significant challenges was assisting Firestone's attorney in debunking the "junk science" put forth by the plaintiff's expert in his attempt to explain this accident. Exponent provided expert witness testimony on behalf of Firestone. The jurors rendered a complete defense verdict for Firestone.

Pilgrim Dry Cleaners v. RR Streets
Working closely with Exponent's Houston office, our engineers studied the design and performance of dry cleaning machinery at the facilities of the largest dry cleaning companies in Houston and San Antonio. This case involved environmental soil and groundwater contamination by perchloroethylene (the most common dry cleaning fluid). The dry cleaning company sued the manufacturers of the dry cleaning equipment for abatement costs ($20,000,000 in this instance) based on a product defect theory. Plaintiffs were relying on theories developed in California that blamed local cities for contamination because their municipal sewers leaked perchloroethylene into the environment, and hence the cities' treasuries could be tapped to pay for the clean-up costs. Our client, RR Streets, manufactured filtration and distillation equipment for cleaning and recycling perchloroethylene at dry cleaning plants. Other defendants had manufactured the actual dry cleaning machines, dryers, and vapor recovery equipment, as well as the perchloroethylene itself. Several co-defendants settled before trial, and all the remaining co-defendants (except RR Streets) settled during trial. The trial resulted in a defense verdict in favor of RR Streets.