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.