USADA - Armstrong

[Topangarider]

i am listening intently...

so far, the federal judge's dismissal with a 20 day re-submittable option sounds to me as armstrong did not comply with some filing formalities whilst the judge, by giving another 20 days, is covering his **** against some federal fair hearing rules. it sounds like an automatic response without any leeway for armstrong.

in the mean time, comes the 14th and USADA will be stupid to extend it. USADA lawyers have thought this through already. if the game is played right, there should be no extension. i am sure armstrong will request usada hearing, and on the 27th of july the federal judge will dismiss it again because the process has been started and the judge wont have the power to stop it...

Luskin screwed up?

 

[Digger]

Bonnie D. Ford ‏@Bonnie_D_Ford
Excerpt #2: Judge says rules demand "a short and plain statement of detailed facts, not a mechanical recital of boilerplate allegations

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Yikes. Whichever side of the issue you're on, I don't think anyone predicted a Rule 8 dismissal.

Here's the text of the 3 page Order signed by the Judge this afternoon....

I understood maybe 50%. And i thought i understand english.
Anyway, from what i understand: It seems the judge is really pi$$ed that Pharmstrong wanted to include him in his silly games. OTOH, why then did he gave him another chance within 20 days? If i was the judge and somebody took me for a fool, i´d have closed that case today.

 

[Mr.DNA]

Waste of tax dollars

After reading Judge Sparks' dismissal, I can only conclude that Armstrong's filing was a waste of my tax dollars.

The court's valuable time could have been spent on less frivolous matters.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

@QuickStepper

Thanks for getting that up so quickly.

Good on the Judge for not letting Wonderboy obfuscate the issue with his endless lines of BS...

Can't wait for USADA to get their hands on him!

 

[Kender]

I understood maybe 50%. And i thought i understand english.
Anyway, from what i understand: It seems the judge is really pi$$ed that Pharmstrong wanted to include him in his silly games. OTOH, why then did he gave him another chance within 20 days? If i was the judge and somebody took me for a fool, i´d have closed that case today.

from my comprehension on what i read from the judge, the report may have contained the information required to file the case, but its not the courts job to sift through the crap to find it. the law states the compaint needs to be short and concise and contain all the facts that can be easily extracted (basically)

so what the judge is basically saying is, give me the summary with all the facts and get back to us.

The lawyers handed over War and Peace. The Judge wanted the Study Notes

I'm no lawyer though so i might be off the mark

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Right. It will take Armstrong's team a day to cut and paste everything they need, and then re submit it.

Wouldn't call it good news necessarily, but news that encourages that an end result will come sooner than later; the judge will not wait around for bull****.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Judge: "This court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement, or vilification of Defendants

He may have invited him to refile, but he also invited him to **** off too. BANG. Wish Polish hadn't gotten banned now...

 

[HL2037]

Ultimately, what Rule 8 demands is a short and plain statement of detailedfacts, not a mechanical recital of boilerplate allegations, nor as is more relevant here a lengthy and bitter polemic against the named defendants.

Armstrong's complaint is far from short, spanning eighty pages and containing 261 numbered paragraphs, many of which have multiple subparts. Worse, the bulk of these paragraphs contain "allegations" that are wholly irrelevant to Armstrong's claimsand which, the Court must presume, were included solely to increase media coverage of this case, and to incite public opinion against Defendants. See, e.g., Compl. [#1] ¶ 10 ("USADA's kangaroo court proceeding would violate due process even if USADA had jurisdiction to pursue its charges against Mr. Armstrong.").Fn 1 Indeed, vast swaths of the complaint could be removed entirely, and most of the remaining paragraphs substantially reduced, without the loss of any legally relevant information.

Nor are Armstrong's claims "plain": although his causes of action are, thankfully, clearly enumerated, the excessive preceding rhetoric makes it difficult to relate them to any particular factual support. This Court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement, or vilification of Defendants, by sifting through eighty mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few kernels of factual material relevant to his claims.

So basically cut the crap and refile the rest?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

He may have invited him to refile, but he also invited him to **** off too. BANG. Wish Polish hadn't gotten banned now...

So, the Judge is looking for brevity?

Can Lance just tweet him #unconstitutional ?

 

[QuickStepper]

After reading Judge Sparks' dismissal, I can only conclude that Armstrong's filing was a waste of my tax dollars.

The court wasted time which could have been spent on less frivolous matters.

No, it was simply a waste of paper on the part of Armstrong's counsel. The fact that Judge Sparks issued an order dismissing the complaint for violating Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure means that the Court didn't want to waste the time (and remember time is money) having to try to ferret out the 7 items that are spelled out in the Judge's Order (i.e., (1) the basis of jurisdiction, (2) the legal claims asserted, (3) against which Defendant each claim is asserted, (4) the facts supporting each claim, (5) a brief statement of why the facts give rise to each claims, (6) the relief sought, and (7) why the claims entitle Plaintiff to the relief sought.).

These are all rather elementary things, and all the judge did was dismiss the case on the basis of a perceived failure on the part of Armstrong's counsel to comply with these requirements.

The judge made absolutely no substantive decision about whether Armstrong can, if he chooses to amend in compliance with the order, state a claim or establish the other elements necessary to obtain the relief sought. The Court was quite clear about that.

The Order permits the complaint to be amended (re-filed) within 20 days. That's an outside limit; if it's not refiled, then the case will be closed; if it's re-filed, the amended complaint supercedes the original filing completely, and will become the operative pleading.

The scary part about Judge Sparks' Order is the reference to Rule 11 sanctions. Rule 11 of the FRCP essentially requires attorneys, when they sign a pleading, to certify that it is in compliance with the FRCP rules of pleading and that it presents a meritorious and justiciable controversy. In other words, it's a certification from counsel that they believe there is merit in the case. If a judge finds that Rule 11 has been violated, the sanctions can be fairly onerous and costly, including the assessment of large monetary fines.

Frankly, I'm sort of surprised that Judge Sparks would have issued such an order, but then, you never can tell what a federal judge is going to think of any particular pleading ahead of time. Sparks was appointed by Bush I, and he was thought to be a fairly conservative fellow at the time of his appointment, a former sheriff and law-enforcement type of guy. But he's issued some really odd rulings since his appointment to the federal bench, and has come down on all different sides of the political spectrum. Take a look at this Wikipedia article for more info on Judge Sam Sparks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sparks

 

[Roland Rat]

So basically cut the crap and refile the rest?

Exactly. I'd bet less than a quarter of that submission was actually read; give it a quick flick through, chuck it back to them to do it properly.

 

[Digger]

Lance has already said to the Statesman he will refile.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Lance has already said to the Statesman he will refile.

Refile or refill? It is the rest day tomorrow.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Yikes. Whichever side of the issue you're on, I don't think anyone predicted a Rule 8 dismissal.

Here's the text of the 3 page Order signed by the Judge this afternoon. (sorry for any formatting errors, but this is cut-and-pasted from a PDF document):


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
LANCE ARMSTRONG,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
TRAVIS TYGART, in his official capacity as
Chief Executive Officer of the United States Anti-
Doping Agency, and UNITED STATES ANTIDOPING
AGENCY,
Defendants.


ORDER
Filed 2012JUL.9 PH 2:45
tjos
Case No. A-12-CA-606-SS


BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Plaintiff Lance Armstrong's Complaint [#1], his Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [#2], and his memorandum [#3] and exhibits [#4] in support thereof. Having reviewed the documents, the relevant law, and the file as a whole, the Court now enters the following opinion and orders DISMISSING Armstrong's complaint and motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that a plaintiff's complaint contain "short and plain" statements of both the basis of the court's jurisdiction, and the plaintiff's legal claim for relief. Likewise, Rule 8(d)(1) states, "Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct." The Supreme Court has recently held that "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). Rule 8 prescribes a middle ground of specificity, not requiring " detailed factual allegations," but demanding "more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Thus, "a pleading that offers 'labels and conclusions' or 'a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do," Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555), nor will a complaint rife with argument and "other things that a pleader, aware of and faithful to the command of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, knows to be completely extraneous," Gordon v. Green, 602 F.2d 743, 745 (5th Cir. 1979). Ultimately, what Rule 8 demands is a short and plain statement of detailedfacts, not a mechanical recital of boilerplate allegations, nor as is more relevant here a lengthy and bitter polemic against the named defendants.

Armstrong's complaint is far from short, spanning eighty pages and containing 261 numbered paragraphs, many of which have multiple subparts. Worse, the bulk of these paragraphs contain "allegations" that are wholly irrelevant to Armstrong's claimsand which, the Court must presume, were included solely to increase media coverage of this case, and to incite public opinion against Defendants. See, e.g., Compl. [#1] ¶ 10 ("USADA's kangaroo court proceeding would violate due process even if USADA had jurisdiction to pursue its charges against Mr. Armstrong.").Fn 1 Indeed, vast swaths of the complaint could be removed entirely, and most of the remaining paragraphs substantially reduced, without the loss of any legally relevant information.

Nor are Armstrong's claims "plain": although his causes of action are, thankfully, clearly enumerated, the excessive preceding rhetoric makes it difficult to relate them to any particular factual support. This Court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement, or vilification of Defendants, by sifting through eighty mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few kernels of factual material relevant to his claims.

Accordingly, Armstrong's complaint, and his accompanying motion, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court grants leave to amend, provided Armstrong can limit his pleadings to: (1) the basis for this Court's jurisdiction; (2) the legal claims he is asserting; (3) against which Defendants each claim is being made; (4) the factual allegations supporting each claim; (5) a brief statement of why such facts give rise to the claim; (6) a statement of the relief sought; and (7) why his claims entitle him to such relief.Fn 2. Armstrong is advised, in the strongest possible terms, and on pain of Rule 11 sanctions, to omit any improper argument, rhetoric, or irrelevant material from his future pleadings.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff Lance Armstrong's Complaint [#11, and his Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [#2], are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling;

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Armstrong shall file any amended complaint within TWENTY (20) DAYS of entry of this order, or this case shall be closed and dismissed for failure to prosecute, and for failure to comply with this Court's orders.

SIGNED this 9th day of July 2012.
SAM SPARKS LI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

________________________
fn 1. Contrary to Armstrong's apparent belief, pleadings filed in the United States District Courts are not press releases, internet blogs, or pieces of investigative journalism. All parties, and their lawyers, are expected to comply with the rules of this Court, and face potential sanctions if they do not.

fn 2. The Court expresses no opinion whether Armstrong actually has a legally cognizable claim against Defendants; it concludes only that his current pleadings are insufficient under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A couple of things, as an prospective attorney who believes in more access to the courts, seeing Iqbal/Twombly makes me want to shake my fist at Scalia and scream. However, he is correct obviously. The funny thing is that Lance's motion claimed the USADA's letter was nothing but "conclusiory" statements devoid of the specifity required by due process. Well, that is exactly what the judge just said about their motion. He also challenged, with his first requirement for refilling, standing as MarkVW pointed out earlier was a problem. He doesn't seem at all convinced that he has jurisdiction, and he certainly doesn't think Armstrong made much if any case that the court had jurisdiction.

That ruling was a straight up smack-down. Lance is going to yell at his lawyers because he paid a lot of money for those 80 pages that is gone. I feel confident that his attorneys have advised him time and again that they don't have a very good case. The judge just proved that to Mr. Armstrong. One can only hope that he will come to his senses and just admit his doping past and get this all over with...but somehow, I bet Lance thinks that a mussette bag just caught his handlebars, and that he will now get up and win at the top of the climb. I am betting the climb will win this time.

 

[python]

but this order to cut the crapp and re-file can also be read as:

'yes i saw it, you put some substance and mostly not so i give you 20 days to come up with more substance and unless you do, i will dismiss it again'.

so, no, i dont see a cut-and-paste by tomorrow, or a day after tomorrow. armstrong is clearly out of time and he wants the injunction by the 14th...

clearly, a self-respecting federal judge is not a uci stooge armstrong could manipulate.

usada 3, armstrong 0.

 

[Jeremiah]

Complete rebuke of Armstrong.

Exactly. I'd bet less than a quarter of that submission was actually read; give it a quick flick through, chuck it back to them to do it properly.

Contrary to Armstrong's apparent belief, pleadings filed in the United States District Courts are not press releases, internet blogs, or pieces of investigative journalism. All parties, and their lawyers, are expected to comply with the rules of this Court, and face potential sanctions if they do not.
Accordingly, Armstrong's complaint, and his accompanying motion, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court grants leave to amend, provided Armstrong can limit his pleadings to: (1) the basis for this Court's jurisdiction; (2) the legal claims he is asserting; (3) against which Defendants each claim is being made; (4) the factual allegations supporting each claim; (5) a brief statement of why such facts give rise to the claim; (6) a statement of the relief sought; and (7) why his claims entitle him to such relief. Armstrong is advised, in the strongest possible terms, and on pain of Rule 11 sanctions, to omit any improper argument, rhetoric, or irrelevant material from his future pleadings

What a ***** slap!

 

[Kender]

haha i like this Judge... from the Wiki on him as an opening to a case report...

"When the undersigned accepted the appointment from the President of the United States of the position now held, he was ready to face the daily practice of law in federal courts with presumably competent lawyers. No one warned the undersigned that in many instances his responsibility would be the same as a person who supervised kindergarten."[

I had images of Lance throwing his toys out of the sandbox

 

[ggusta]

but this order to cut the crapp and re-file can also be read as:

'yes i saw it, you put some substance and mostly not so i give you 20 days to come up with more substance and unless you do, i will dismiss it again'.

so, no, i dont see a cut-and-paste by tomorrow, or a day after tomorrow. armstrong is clearly out of time and he wants the injunction by the 14th...

clearly, a self-respecting federal judge is not a uci stooge armstrong could manipulate.

usada 3, armstrong 0.

'Your lawyer is actually charging you for this cr@p? Go pay him another $50k to put together 8 real pages instead of 80 pages of PR for your groupies to dry their eyes with and maybe we'll have something, but frankly, it doesn't look that way.'

'This looks like a guy who has nothing but just is stalling for a few days to lob a few more PR grenades.'

The USADA should just plow on as if nothing has happened and shove it up his derriere with a red hot poker.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

I can't recall when I have seen a more scathing decision/order from a Federal judge. To threaten his counsel and Armstrong with Rule 11 sanctions is likely sending a chill through several law firms in Washington and Texas. The big boys aren't supposed to play this kind of game in federal court. It may very well play in Texas State court, but that's in another universe.


Mr. Armstrong is now in a rather difficult position with this judge. Assuming USADA does not grant another extension to Armstrong, if Armstrong files his case again in Federal court, the judge might well sit on a decision until after Armstrong has to unload or get off the can with USADA. If Armstrong elects to go to arbitration, the judge could dismiss his complaint as being premature; could decide that no colorable claim had been made to support federal jurisdiction at this time. And if Armstrong does nothing, his case is effectively dismissed with prejudice twenty one days from now.

This in an interesting lesson in how Federal judges tell jerks to go screw themselves. God but I wish I was the fly on Fabio's wall.

 

[Ninety5rpm]

I feel confident that his attorneys have advised him time and again that they don't have a very good case.

I don't feel that. I think LA hires only Fanboy lawyers who say what he needs to hear. Who else would have come up with 80 pages of crap like that? Tell Armstrong he has no case? You're gone!

I also disagree with those who think the judge implied there was something of merit in what was filed, and LA just needs to cut out the crap.

The judge definitely said LA needs to cut out the crap, because that's required to see if there is anything of merit in what is being filed.

 

[QuickStepper]

Lance has already said to the Statesman he will refile.

Was there any doubt that he would refile the complaint? I would anticipate that it will be re-filed tomorrow or by Wednesday at the latest, in order to allow Judge Sparks (and his law clerks) sufficient time to research the claims and if the Judge is so inclined, to set a hearing on the TRO application for sometime before the 14th of July deadline. Alternatively, Sparks could simply issue a TRO and set it for hearing on whether or not a Preliminary Injunction should issue, pendente lite (i.e., for the duration of the litigation) until after the trial and judgment are entered.Or, he could once again determine that there's not enough meat there and simply dismiss it outright for many of the reasons that some people upthread have suggested (i.e., no subject matter jurisdiction, no state action, etc.).

I am still somewhat surprised after reading the entirety of the complaint, that Judge Sparks did what he did, but then again, it's Texas and they do what they want sometimes in Texas. Had this been filed in a California U.S. District Court (there'd be no basis for venue of course, so this is just a rhetorical example. . . but I'm just saying), based on my own more than 30 years of practice in federal courts here, I cannot think of any federal judge before whom I've appeared that would have dismissed this complaint on the basis that it contains too much information, since Rule 8 dismissals are usually reserved where there is a failure to allege enough. But upon re-reading the complaint in this instance, it's certainly not a model of clarity, and I can fully appreciate Judge Sparks' frustrations with it, because it refers to "Defendants" in the plural and yet none of the causes of action (denominated "Counts") identifies which defendant in particular is the subject of the three claims that are set out. There is roughly 70 pages of "Introductory" and "factual" allegations that precede the 3 counts contained in the complaint, and as the Order notes, much of it could be greatly condensed.

Those guys at Patton Boggs are going to be busy tonight re-editing the document to comply. Should be interesting to see what gets re-filed.

 

[ManInFull]

After reading Judge Sparks' dismissal, I can only conclude that Armstrong's filing was a waste of my tax dollars.

The court's valuable time could have been spent on less frivolous matters.

I absolutely love the judge's smack down! Hopefully, the judge will do the same again if Lance actually refiles.

 

[Microchip]

I think this is what got His Honour really mad:

Quote:
At the age of 12, Mr. Armstrong finished fourth for his age group in the Texas youth swimming championships in the 1,500- meter freestyle event.
____________________________________________________________

So how does the USADA deadline of this weekend factor in with the 20 days that His Honour gave him?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...thin-20-days/2012/07/09/gJQA2SyzYW_story.html

Federal judge dismisses Lance Armstrong lawsuit, but will allow him to refile within 20 days

____________________________________________________________

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL...!!

What should he change? His $uckers wrote 150+ pages. What else can they add, other than kill GH, FL, TH, etc...

____________________________________________________________

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! This is precious:

So, the Judge is looking for brevity?

Can Lance just tweet him #unconstitutional ?

____________________________________________________________

+1 for this:

Does this mean he has twenty more days before he has to request a hearing? Sounds that way. If so, I don't like this. Just further delays ...

 

[MacRoadie]

The way I see it (as a non-lawyer) is that Sparks had three choices:

1. Wade through and find the required elements that he suggests could be hidden within all the BS.

2. Issue a simple dismissal providing a short, bullet point list of the required elements.

3. Issue a scathing and chastising dismissal, critical of the approach taken by Armstrong (including, in his words,vilification of defendants).

He chose the latter.