Results for: Ahmed R. El-Ghannam

Ahmed R. El-Ghannam

Biomedical Engineering

Charlotte, North Carolina

If you're not satisfied,
we don't expect you to pay.

That's our commitment and your guarantee. Simply ask for a refund.

Expert Details

Dr. Ahmed R. El-Ghannam, Ph.D., is a Professor based in Charlotte, North Carolina. He is an Associate Professor at University of North Carolina and the Director of Orthopedic Tissue Engineering and Biomaterials Lab in the Dept. of Mechanical Engineering and Engineering Science since the year 2007. He did his Bachelor of Science in chemistry at Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt in 1982. He completed his Masters Inorganic Chemistry from Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt in 1988. He did his M.S.E. from University Of Pennsylvania in Bioengineering in 1993. Then he completed his Ph.D. Bioengineering from the same institution in 1995. He has over 30 years of experience in the development of medical devices for tissue construction and disease treatment. He has six US patents in bioceramics and tissue engineering. Dr. El-Ghannam also holds the EPIC (Energy Production and Infrastructure Center) Faculty Associate position at University Of North Carolina since 2013. He held the position of Assistant Professor at University Of Kentucky, Center for Biomedical Engineering, Lexington, Ky and at National Research Center, Glass Research Department, Cairo, Egypt. He was a Visiting Scholar University of Pennsylvania from the year 2000 to 2002. He is an Active member in the "Drug delivery system" Special Interest Group, "Biomaterials Education" Special Interest Group and in the "Tissue engineering" Special Interest Group. He is the Associate Editor of the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, the official Journal of the American Society of Biomaterials, Japanese Society for Biomaterials, Korean Society for Biomaterial and the Australian Society for Biomaterials since the year 2007. He participated with his students and colleagues to make a TV show about his lab at UNC Charlotte presenting one of the active research projects currently underway related to new treatment for liver cancer. The show was aired on WTVI April 7th at noon, Tuesday and Friday at 12:30pm and 6:30pm; and Sunday at 8:30am and 6:30pm on April 2013 on UNC Charlotte Cable TV, Time Warner channel 22. The youtube link of the show is - http://youtu.be/eBChjqFEaoM. He was the winner of ADMET, Inc contest (2009) for the design of a new mechanical tester which is a special design for the bioceramic samples prepared in my lab. The machine was worth $ 32000. He was the recipient of Materials Research Society Graduate Student Award in 1993. Dr. El-Ghannam has many publications in Orthopedics, Dental and Biomaterials Engineering journals that focus on the development of bioceramics for multifaceted applications including bone reconstruction, drug delivery to treat cancer and infection and augment soft tissue to treat urination incontinence.
A previous Expert Challenge Study on Ahmed R. El-Ghannam's revealed:
Total Challenges 3
Direct Challenges 3
Indirect Challenges 0

Preliminary Screening Report

The Preliminary Screening Report (PSR) gives you both a snapshot of an expert's testimonial history and an accurate assessment of how prolific a testifier that expert has been in the past. Most importantly, it is a tool to help you determine if there is enough information available regarding the expert to justify the investment in a full Expert Witness Profile.

The PSR has the added value of identifying challenges to the expert’s testimony in reported cases, through our sister company, The Daubert Tracker.

Because the cost of the Screening Report will be deducted from the cost of the full report, it is always best to begin the research process with a PSR.

Drawn from the broadest array of public and proprietary databases, these inexpensive ($25.00) reports include the number of times the expert’s name was found in:

  • Affidavits and Reports
  • Dockets
  • Federal Agency Decisions
  • Jury Verdict Reports
  • Motions
  • Pleadings
  • Briefs
  • Orders
  • Opinions
  • State Agency Decisions
  • Transcripts and Depositions

In summary, the PSR will give you an idea of how prolific a testifier the expert has been, whether or not there is a likelihood of challenge activity in the expert’s past and help to define the level of additional research required.

Expert Challenge Study

Learn about cases where an expert has been challenged under Daubert or their testimony has been criticized by the judge or the opposing party. See the grounds for such challenges, their outcomes (where available) and citations to underlying documents. The Challenge Study includes direct challenges to experts as well as instances where the expert's testimony/ affidavit was submitted in support or against a motion.

Like the Profile, the Expert Challenge Study is created by a team of professional expert witness researchers, all lawyers, who have access to databases not readily available to most law firms.

  • The expert was deemed not qualified (unqualified).
  • The expert’s methods were questionable, suspicious, not valid (invalid), lacking or inadequate.
  • The expert was not credible (incredible) or believable (unbelievable).
  • The testimony was outside the scope of the expertise of the expert.
  • The testimony was not relevant (irrelevant).
  • The testimony was not reliable (unreliable).
  • The testimony was flawed.
  • The expert’s methods were not scientific (unscientific).
  • The testimony was speculative.
  • The expert was deemed not competent, incompetent.
  • The testimony was questionable.
  • The testimony was predicated on an improper (or was lacking) foundation, basis or grounds.
  • The testimony was based on insufficient evidence, false assumptions or evidence not in the record.
  • The expert drew conclusions not supported by the evidence.
  • The testimony of the expert was impeached.
  • The testimony was based on methods which were unscientific (not scientific, junk science).
  • The testimony would not assist the trier of fact.
  • The testimony was, amounted to or drew a legal conclusion.
  • The testimony was used to support a motion for summary judgment and the motion was granted/ denied.
  • There were two conflicting expert testimonies and the case was decided in the favor of one party (thereby implying that one expert’s testimony was given more weight than another’s).
  • The testimony or opinion was conclusory.
  • Any other assessment of the expert or his/her testimony which reflects on or affects the assessment of the overall qualifications and credibility of the expert – either in a good or a bad way, particularly critical comments of any kind by the judge who wrote the opinion (even if there was no formal attempt to exclude or limit the testimony of the expert on the part of one of the attorneys.

All of the data and information in the Expert Challenge Study is contained in the full Expert Witness Profile.

Expert Witness Profile

10 business days - $495.00
The Expert Witness Profile is the most comprehensive and cost-effective background report on an expert witness in the United States today. The product is used by lawyers, law librarians and paralegals practicing in every area of law and by the widest array of organizations: from AMLAW 100 law firms to sole practitioners to national associations of attorneys to expert search firms and even by expert witnesses themselves.