Time Marches on: NASL and USSF Prepare for Next Battle in Anti-Trust Lawsuit

No time to dwell on the past. After denying the NASL’s appeal of the District Court’s ruling denying a preliminary injunction, the parties were required to come together within seven days to discuss the next steps of the case. This included setting a schedule to argue the USSF’s motion to dismiss. We not only got that, but clarification on couple of other procedural issues.

You can read the entire letter here, but we’ll focus on the important part below: the case schedule.

This answers a few questions. First, NASL has the opportunity to amend their complaint to add additional causes of action or facts/allegations to support their case, should they wish to by March 9, 2018. You can imagine this will include any issues that have arisen since they filed the case back in September of 2017.

Additionally, USSF has *never* filed a response/answer to NASL’s complaint. This would involve admitting or denying the allegations made by NASL (you can guess how that will go), as well as listing any affirmative/legal defenses and making counter-claims. It’s not stated, but that date (April 20, 2018) is also when I assume that USSF will file their formal briefing on the motion to dismiss, though that could be earlier I suppose. After USSF files their briefing on the motion to dismiss (or other motions), NASL will file their response to those documents by May 25, 2018.

Finally, USSF will file their reply to anything NASL submits by June 11, 2018. After that, a hearing will be scheduled to argue the motion (unless the parties agree to forgo oral arguments). That will likely take place in late June 2018, with a ruling shortly thereafter. As there is no longer a need to expedite matters due to NASL cancelling the season, the lawsuit will proceed on a normal track, though both parties would of course like to get the matter moving.

Assuming NASL survives the motion to dismiss, the parties would then confer on setting the matter for trial. This would include setting a trial date, as well outlining the discovery process.

Advertisements
  1. […] As previously discussed, per the joint letter filed with the court, the NASL indicated that they would likely amend their complaint. Well, they did that and some, formally adding MLS as a defendant in the federal anti-trust case. […]

    Like

    Reply

  2. […] been more litigation between the federation, the top division of US Soccer and the NASL, the latter of which now sits in a corner room somewhere, clinging to life on a Jeffrey Kessler […]

    Like

    Reply

  3. […] are due May 11, 2018. In the meantime, we’ll have USSF’s responsive documents in the anti-trust case, which could involve yet another motion to dismiss. Good […]

    Like

    Reply

  4. […] are roughly about a week out before the U.S. Soccer Federation and Major League Soccer have to respond to the (amended) NASL anti-trust suit. That is likely to take the form of a motion to dismiss the […]

    Like

    Reply

  5. […] stipulated to a scheduling order which required USSF/MLS to respond to the Amended complaint by April 20. That date was further delayed to May […]

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Advertisements
Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: