The IBF has filed a Motion to Dismiss in the Jai Opetaia lawsuit. The parties stipulated to move the due dates for the Opposition Brief and Reply.
Opetaia’s brief will be due September 22nd while the IBF will also have extra time to file its Reply due October 13th.
Notably, Opetaia fights this Saturday on the undercard of Ryan Garcia and Conor Benn.
The IBF cites its governing rules which indicate that an IBF Championship “will be declared vacant” if a champion proceeds with a contest after IBF sanctioning has been withdrawn.” The IBF argues that it initially granted the fight but withdrew its support citing that an IBF fighter could not box for another championship without prior approval.
Thus, the IBF argues that Opetaia’s allegations of fraud and conspiracy in its Complaint are not true.
In addition, the IBF argues that Opetaia did not follow the procedures as required by the rules in appealing the decision to strip him of the title.
The IBF also cite the distinguishing factors between this case and that of the Mahmoud Charr suing Don King.
As for its Ali Act allegation lodged by Opetaia, the IBF argues that the fighter lacks standing because he cannot identify the injury and/or claimed damage. While Opetaia had to pay the IBF a $73K sanctioning fee, the IBF states it was returned.
Payout Perspective:
We won’t hear about this case until after the New Zealander’s fight on Saturday night. But the lack of exhausting all remedies through the IBF is a relevant argument regardless of how the appeal would turn out. Notably, how ill the Court interpret the Charr case in light of these facts as that case had similar issues. In that case, Charr claimed that the WBA and King conspired together to strip him of his title. Charr was later restored as the WBA heavyweight champion after an exhaustive legal process. MPO will continue to follow.
Leave a Reply