Yesterday marked a significant setback for the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit delivered a concise yet impactful decision, denying the promotion’s petition for permission to appeal. In a one-page document, the Ninth Circuit concluded with a resounding, “The petition for permission to appeal is denied.”
This ruling dealt a blow to the UFC’s efforts to avoid a looming antitrust trial, a case that has garnered widespread attention within the mixed martial arts (MMA) industry. The UFC’s argument revolved around challenging the credibility of expert witnesses representing five former UFC fighters who serve as plaintiffs in the case. The promotion contested the methodology used by these experts, specifically their utilization of a “wage share” theory to illustrate fighter injuries resulting from alleged anticompetitive behavior by the UFC. Additionally, the UFC raised concerns about the assumption of a common impact across all fighters.
Related: Judge May Grant UFC Antitrust Suit Class-Action Status
Despite the UFC’s contentions, the Ninth Circuit sided against the promotion in its decision. Notably, the court’s order did not offer any detailed explanation for its verdict. Had the Ninth Circuit accepted the UFC’s petition, the impending antitrust trial would have been put on hold, possibly extending the proceedings by 2-3 years while the appeals process played out.
Shortly after the Ninth Circuit’s decision became public, U.S. District Judge Richard Boulware of Las Vegas, the presiding trial judge, issued a minute order. In this order, Judge Boulware not only reaffirmed the previously announced trial date of April 2024 but also expedited certain aspects of the proceedings.
Source: Forbes
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand