Dominance MMA, the agents for some of the UFC’s top stars has filed a response to the Plaintiffs in the Kajan Jouhnson antitrust lawsuit regarding the fighters’ request for costs and attorneys fees associated with a dispute over the disclosure of documents per a subpoena request.
The dispute over documents per a subpoena issued to the agency has gone on over several months and multiple court hearings. At the beginning of April, Plaintiffs filed a motion for fees and costs arguing that Dominance had violated a court order. As a result, Plaintiffs request in its motion was for the time and cost it took for it to attempt to obtain the documents in the subpoena. Plaintiffs state that it spent 286.10 hours on the work from August 2025 to April 2026.
Dominance attorneys argued that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses was “not a good-faith request to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees tied to any specific sanctionable conduct.” The response goes on to argue that “Plaintiffs seek to shift the cost of their own litigation strategy onto a nonparty…” It reminds the Court that it Dominance had up to $10K in costs to pay its own attorneys but should not have to do anything more than that. Despite a portion of Plaintiffs initial Motion to Compel documents was granted, it was denied in part, and established a threshhold for Dominance to spend.
The below letter is from Dominance’s attorneys:
In its opposition, Dominance suggests that the total “reasonable amount of time for this work would be in the range of 15 to 20 hours.”
Dominance argues that Plaintiffs attempt to expand on the amount of time to work on the request by including time periods in which Dominance was working with Plaintiffs in attempting to comply with the subpoena. But, Dominance points out concerns of privacy in the document production with Plaintiffs which led to a slowdown in the discovery process. In fact, Dominance argues that it ha substantially complied with the court orders that addressed the document issues in August 2025 and October 2025.
Ali Abdelaziz’s cell phone is one of the bigger items sought by Plaintiffs in this discovery dispute and Dominance notes in its brief that it complied with the Court Order.
The Plaintiffs have a chance to file a Reply Brief to this opposition which will likely address the issue of the time of non-compliance and the hefty legal and cost bill it seeks from Dominance. If you are Dominance, you would like to make sure that you don’t have to pay since they are not even a party to the lawsuit.
MPO will continue to follow.
Leave a Reply