A Texas district court judge is getting set to rule on the lawsuit filed against the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) by Lance Armstrong's attorneys aimed at blocking the agency from pursuing anti-doping violation charges against the seven-time Tour de France champion.
Armstrong's attorneys have made their last arguments against the motion to dismiss filed by USADA in a letter dated August 17, 2012 from the office of Timothy J. Herman to judge Sam Sparks.
The case was filed originally in early July by Armstrong's attorneys ahead of a deadline set by USADA for Armstrong to respond to charges of doping and conspiracy during his time as a professional cyclist.
In the case, the lawyers argued that USADA's actions were unconstitutional, claims that appear to have been left out of the latest 12-page filing. It has now focused its efforts on challenging the jurisdiction of the agency.
USADA agreed to extend the deadline for Armstrong to either accept his lifetime ban for the alleged offenses or take the case to arbitration, where the full dossier of evidence would be presented to August 23 in order for the judge to consider the legal claims.
The dossier is said to include evidence based upon biological passport samples from Armstrong's comeback years showing a profile indicative of doping as well as witness testimony regarding widespread doping practices on Armstrong's former teams.
USADA has not released the names of the witnesses nor the evidence given, stating that itneeds to protect their identities in order to prevent witness intimidation.
Armstrong's attorneys contend that USADA does not have the jurisdiction to pursue anti-doping violations using samples taken by the UCI. The UCI itself has also claimed that it should be the one to examine the evidence in the case.
It also objects to having been given little evidence to examine that substantiates USADA's anti-doping violation claims.
However, the World Anti-Doping Agency stood by the USADA, while the UCI accused WADA of having a political agenda against cycling.
Judge Sparks heard arguments in the case last week, but delayed ruling on the case.
More as the story develops.
No comments:
Post a Comment