Parties file joint motion on Michael Mersch depo testimony in Zuffa Antitrust Lawsuit

July 1, 2018

This past Friday, Plaintiffs a joint motion in the UFC Antitrust lawsuit filed a Motion to Seal Reply In Support of Its Motion to Seal Plaintiffs’ Class Certification Reply.  The motion, which includes both plaintiffs and defendants’ position seeks to seal certain deposition testimony from Michael Mersch as well as certain confidential information from his deposition.

Zuffa points out that the motion to seal is based on what’s included in its Reply Brief and unrelated to the merits of the case.  Zuffa is requesting to seal information in Mersch’s deposition testimony regarding the purse information of a UFC athlete based on privacy concerns expressed to Mersch.  It claims that evidentiary objections made by Plaintiffs are improper.

Plaintiff asserts that Zuffa has failed to meet its burden to seal portions of the Mersch deposition.  They believe that the earnings that fighters receive and Zuffa’s strategy of preventing its fighters from learning what others maker are not compelling reasons or good cause to seal the information.  The overarching argument is that there is no legal argument for the sealing of the information and the information (i.e., purse information) has been disclosed publicly by other sources.  Moreover, Plaintiffs argue that the information sought to seal is four years old and would have no trade secret value in present day.

Joint Motion Re Motion to Seal by JASONCRUZ206 on Scribd

Payout Perspective:

It would seem that the parties are making more of a battle over sealed information.  The payouts appear to be over two fighters if you infer from the exhibits attached to this joint motion.  Wikipedia pages are attached regarding payouts for UFC heavyweights Ben Rothwell and Alistair Overeem. The declaration of the Plaintiff’s attorney states as much.  Clearly, Zuffa wants to seal the testimony because they believe there is something there that might influence the Court or is previously not publicly disclosed.  Plaintiffs would like this information unsealed because they believe it would be useful.

Got something to say?

You must be logged in to post a comment.