Whether federal statutory and regulatory scheme for research misconduct preempted state law defamation claims

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner reported scientific research misconduct in climate change mitigation research to the federally funded Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories (LBNL) under federal regulation 48 C.F.R. §952.23571 to initiate an investigation. In _ response, Respondent, who conducted research at LBNL, filed state court lawsuit for defamation, intentional infliction of emotion distress (ITED) and negligence and obtained a large judgment after trial. Petitioner's statements were based on uncontroverted scientific facts proving contamination in Respondent’s data that was used by LBNL scientists leading to inaccurate results. Petitioner’s complaint, which was neither inquired into nor investigated, satisfied the requirements of the federal regulation to implicate research misconduct by preponderance of the evidence. But : state law demanded substantial truth. The questions presented are: 1. Whether federal statutory and regulatory scheme, for research misconduct, displaced . state law from subject matter jurisdiction on defamation claims arising from complaint made under that regulation, and 2. Whether First Amendment, applicable to the ; states through the Fourteenth Amendment, protects the complainant of research misconduct when he outlines the factual and scientific basis of his conclusions constituting an opinion on a subject of public concern. ; n 1 :