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
European Music Streaming Firms Rally Against Apple’s Proposed Remedies
May 9, 2024 by
CPI
Google and South Carolina Clash Over State Records Demand
May 8, 2024 by
CPI
Telefonica Germany Teams Up with Amazon Web Services to Migrate 5G Customers
May 8, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Grants $7.4 Million Settlement in Pork Price-Fixing Case
May 8, 2024 by
CPI
Wilson Sonsini Bolsters Antitrust and Competition Practice with Key Partner Returns
May 8, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI