Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Endorsed Letter Re Pulev - Matchroom Boxing

    Uploaded by

    MMA Payout
    358 views2 pages
    This letter requests that the court unseal documents related to a boxing match contract between Andy Ruiz and Anthony Joshua. Ruiz defeated Joshua for the heavyweight title but agreed to an immediate rematch due to the contract. Kubrat Pulev, the number one contender, argues the contract violates IBF rules by not allowing Ruiz to first defend against him. Pulev wants access to the sealed contract and other documents for an upcoming IBF hearing to determine if Ruiz was obligated to seek an exception for the rematch rather than first fight Pulev. Since the case was dismissed and plaintiffs failed to show documents should remain sealed, Pulev requests the court order them unsealed.

    Original Description:

    Ex Parte Application DENIED by Court requesting POS from Ruiz lawsuit

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This letter requests that the court unseal documents related to a boxing match contract between Andy Ruiz and Anthony Joshua. Ruiz defeated Joshua for the heavyweight title but agreed to an immediate rematch due to the contract. Kubrat Pulev, the number one contender, argues the contract violates IBF rules by not allowing Ruiz to first defend against him. Pulev wants access to the sealed contract and other documents for an upcoming IBF hearing to determine if Ruiz was obligated to seek an exception for the rematch rather than first fight Pulev. Since the case was dismissed and plaintiffs failed to show documents should remain sealed, Pulev requests the court order them unsealed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    358 views2 pages

    Endorsed Letter Re Pulev - Matchroom Boxing

    Uploaded by

    MMA Payout
    This letter requests that the court unseal documents related to a boxing match contract between Andy Ruiz and Anthony Joshua. Ruiz defeated Joshua for the heavyweight title but agreed to an immediate rematch due to the contract. Kubrat Pulev, the number one contender, argues the contract violates IBF rules by not allowing Ruiz to first defend against him. Pulev wants access to the sealed contract and other documents for an upcoming IBF hearing to determine if Ruiz was obligated to seek an exception for the rematch rather than first fight Pulev. Since the case was dismissed and plaintiffs failed to show documents should remain sealed, Pulev requests the court order them unsealed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Case 1:19-cv-07912-PKC Document

    LAW OFFICES 14 Filed 10/08/19 Page 1 of 2

    WIRT & WIRT


    PROFESSIONAL ASS0C!ATI0N

    [email protected] 5 CALHOUN AVENUE, UNIT 306 TELEPHONE (847) 485-WIRT

    www.wirtlawfirm.com DESTIN, FLORIDA 32571 TELECOP!ER (314) 431-6920

    '/~ .;._~
    October 4, 2019

    VIA E-MAIL: [email protected]:


    -::~~_;
    ~~~
    Honorable P. Kevin Castel A- . .. /.,, ~ D~u,ei>_
    United States District Judge / I J-1"~- .
    SouthemDistrictofNewYork ~~
    United States Courthouse -r- A n ___ • _ / - fi
    500 Pearl St. ~ , ~ - l ~'-
    New York, NY 10007-1312 ~ t:>-,{~
    Re: Matchroom Boxing Limited v. TGB Promotions LLC e t ~ De._.~
    CaseNo. l:19-cv-07912 · 0 ~ ~ , . , ..
    ~. - L
    Dear Judge Castel: z;- ~~ ..
    We represent IBF No. 1 Mandatory Challenger, Kubrat Pulev. t) IZ.P ell..t?IJ
    0 5
    I apologize for the unusual nature of this request. , ~

    After Andy Ruiz defeated the then-reigning unified IBF / ~ B r {World U5/).J
    Heavyweight Champion Anthony Joshua on June 1, 2019 at Madison Square Garden in a
    huge upset, Ruiz, as the new champion, had an obligation under the IBF Rules to defend
    /ti
    tV -
    3- /,f
    his title against Pulev in Ruiz' next bout without any intervening bouts. As you may recall,
    Matchroom sued Ruiz to enforce an immediate rematch clause in the contract (the "POS")
    that was filed as Exhibit A to the Complaint (ECF No. 4), but which was provisionally
    sealed by the Court (ECF No. 6) (the "Sealing Order").

    Ruiz requested an exception from the IBF to do the rematch which it


    J granted. We have appealed that decision and a hearing is scheduled for next Thursday,
    October 10, 2019, in Newark at the IBF's offices. We contend that the POS contains a
    prohibited rematch clause under IBF Rule 3.B which provides as follows:

    No contract for a Championship contest shall contain any


    clause or any provision, whatsoever, guaranteeing or in any
    way assuring or promising either contestant a return
    Case 1:19-cv-07912-PKC Document 14 Filed 10/08/19 Page 2 of 2
    Honorable P. Kevin Castel
    October 4, 2019
    Page2

    Championship contest where such clause or provision


    interferes with the mandatory defense of a title. 1

    We also contend that the POS contains a provision that obligates Ruiz to
    request an exception from the IBF and that Matchroom/Joshua agreed to pay the $20,000
    exception fee. Under the IBF Rule 11, only the reigning champion has the right to request
    an exception, but Rule 3.B. infers that the champion must not be under a contractual
    obligation to do so. There are a number of other documents which were filed with the
    Court under seal which we believe may contain evidence that Ruiz was effectively forced
    by Matchroom to seek the exception due to the prohibited rematch clause in the POS.

    In the Court's Sealing Order, the Court noted:


    'Plaintiff ha$ failed to adGquately demonstrate ~I lhe p;rasomp'tlon ,of pubUe a,ccess ooght riot ctmitrol.
    See, Lugosch v. Pyrarid C::-0. of Ooo-ndaga, 425 F.3cl 110, 1 lS~W ,(2tl• Ck 200.Sj.
    fhe Court will dreelde Iha, s.eidlng issue after heatli;;g from dl;)fuf!ld,'atitlil il'I writing by August 30.

    The case was voluntarily dismissed on August 26, 2019, prior to the August
    30, 2019 date set by the Court in the Sealing Order. We do not have any right to discovery
    with the IBF and therefore having the POS is very important for our client to establish that
    Ruiz was acting as Joshua's agent in requesting the exception from the IBF due to his
    contractual rematch obligation under the POS.

    Since Plaintiff has failed to adequately demonstrate why the documents


    should remain sealed and Defendants have not sought to keep the documents under seal,
    we would respectfully request that the Court order that the documents be unsealed.

    Respectfully submitted,

    Isl John Wirt

    John S. Wirt

    1
    https://www.ibfusbaregistration.com/ibfusba 02APR2014/images/pdfs/IBFChampionshipContestRules0 l
    19.pdf

    You might also like