In Johnson v. Mead Johnson & Co., 754 F.3d 557 (8th Cir. 2014) (Nos. 13-1681, 13-1685), the Eighth Circuit reversed a summary judgment entered for the defendant baby formula manufacturer. The plaintiff infant alleged that the formula was contaminated with bacteria, but the district court found that the plaintiffs’ experts’ proffered causation opinions were inadequate. The Eighth Circuit reviewed the opinions in question and reversed, holding that the challenged experts’ differential diagnosis analysis that found the defendant’s product to be a possible cause of plaintiff’s injury satisfied the Daubert standard for trustworthiness. The court found there was independent evidence that the product had been tainted by bacteria, and thus, the claim presented a question for the jury to decide, rather than the court.