Judge Pauses Follow-On Antitrust Lawsuit Against The UFC

A federal judge put a pause on a second set of antitrust proceedings against the UFC on Friday, deciding instead to let the appeals process of an earlier lawsuit play out to its ultimate conclusion.

Six now-former UFC fighters sued the MMA promotion in 2014 for alleged monopoly and monopsony conduct claiming, among other things, the promotion’s use of long-term, exclusive fighter contracts violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act and lead to higher pay-per-view prices and lower fighter pay. That case, known as Le in reference to former UFC fighter and current plaintiff Cung Le, covers December 2010 to June 2017 and is presently awaiting a written order granting class certification from U.S. District Judge Richard Boulware of Las Vegas.

Friday’s hearing in front of the same judge addressed the UFC’s motion to dismiss a follow-on lawsuit to Le called Johnson, in reference to another former UFC fighter and plaintiff in the new case, Kajan Johnson. Filed in 2021, the Johnson antitrust lawsuit covers July 2017 to present day and essentially alleges the UFC continued its purported anticompetitive conduct, with one key difference. The Johnson case also names the UFC’s parent company Endeavor as a defendant in an effort “to hold accountable Endeavor… for its active involvement in suppressing Fighter compensation.”

The Friday hearing continued the trend of UFC and plaintiffs’ attorneys being diametrically opposed on just about everything. Plaintiffs wanted Boulware to allow the Johnson case to proceed, then immediately put a stay on the discovery process of data and document collection and depositions until the Le lawsuit is fully resolved. At that point, the Johnson case would continue, ultimately resulting in two separate trials on the UFC’s business practices.

Lead UFC attorney Bill Isaacson responded, “I’ve not encountered a case where a plaintiff wanted a stay and two trials and then said that’s the most efficient.”

Boulware then transitioned into what would ultimately be a pivotal factor in his decision to pause Johnson – a pending Supreme Court petition in the tuna price fixing case Olean Wholesale Grocery Cooperative, Inc. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC. That petition seeks clarification on the circumstances in which the presence of uninjured class members would prevent a class action from being certified.

In the Le case, Boulware has already indicated he will certify the class, increasing the number of potential plaintiffs from six fighters at present to over 1,200. But he hasn’t released his written justification and the UFC has confirmed it will immediately appeal after he does.

Olean relates to Le because the plaintiffs in Le claim if the UFC is eventually proven to have abused its purported monopoly and monopsony power, 14 fighters wouldn’t have been harmed by the reduction in competition from other MMA promoters. All but one of those fighters are current or former UFC stars: Brock Lesnar, Anderson Silva, Conor McGregor, Georges St-Pierre, Quinton “Rampage” Jackson, Dan Henderson, Jon Jones, Tito Ortiz, Mirko Cro Cop, Wanderlei Silva, Matt Hughes, CM Punk, Junior dos Santos, and “Big Nog” Antonio Noguiera. Like Brock Lesnar, CM Punk made his name in professional wrestling, but their MMA paths diverged when Punk took two immediate beatings on UFC pay-per-view main cards and exited the promotion.

When the issue of uninjured fighters was raised in the hearing, plaintiffs’ attorney Eric Cramer noted, “…we can identify the fighters who were not impacted and we can remove them from the class.” Put another way, Conor McGregor, Jon Jones, Anderson Silva, GSP, and other legends of the sport may be prohibited from taking part in the class action since the plaintiffs concluded that more competition from other MMA promoters would have lowered their pay.

It’s a head-scratching result that doesn’t mesh with academic research finding it’s the UFC’s biggest star fighters who likely have the strongest claim of being “underpaid.” Boulware didn’t address Cramer’s statement at the time and simply moved on.

After initially leaning towards allowing the follow-on Johnson case to proceed but with focused, targeted discovery to determine whether Endeavor, as the UFC’s parent company, should remain a defendant, Boulware said he became “convinced” the role of Endeavor can’t be separated out.

He then put the entire Johnson case on pause, stating, “I think [my] order on class certification in Le will drive a lot of what will happen in Johnson.”

The UFC will appeal Boulware’s class certification order in Le to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then possibly the Supreme Court. Boulware indicated that the result of the appeals process could affect his decision on whether to dismiss the follow-on Johnson case. So he denied the UFC’s motion to dismiss without prejudice – essentially sending it back to the UFC – put the entire case on pause, and said he’ll address it again after the UFC’s upcoming Le appeal is “finalized.”

The hearing also revealed small details like the acknowledgment that any eventual trial would last around four weeks and the UFC has added arbitration clauses to its fighter contracts since the Endeavor purchase in 2016, although no specifics were provided.

Yet the end result is more waiting.

If the Supreme Court accepts the Olean petition, the UFC won’t even be able to start its appeal until that case is resolved. If the petition is rejected, Boulware has already gone on record saying a UFC appeal of his class certification order could take two to three years.

So the antitrust claims against the UFC slog on ever so slowly. What’s already been a four-and-a-half year process just to resolve class certification will only get longer.