(Puerto Rico Soccer League NFP Corp., et al. v. Federacion Puertorriquena de Futbol Inc., et al., No. 23-1203, D. Puerto Rico)
(Defendants’ urgent motion available. Document #46-250402-023B. Plaintiffs’ response available. Document #46-250402-024B.)
The defendants filed their urgent motion on March 20.
Puerto Rico Soccer League NFP Corp. and various others sued the Federacion Puertorriquena de Futbol Inc. and directors for alleged violations of Sherman Act Section 1, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), various claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 17 U.S.C. § 1962(c), 1962(b), 1962(d), and tortious interference with contract, abuse of process and breach of fiduciary duty under Puerto Rico law. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants, in cooperation with others, restricted the market for soccer tournaments and other events in Puerto Rico.
Settlement
The plaintiffs also include Marc Serralta Ives, Juan M. Cornejo, Maria Larracuento, Jose R. Olmo-Rodriguez and Futbol Boricua (FBNET) Inc. The other defendants are Ivan Rivera-Gutierrez, Jose “Cukito” Martinez, Gabriel Ortiz, Luis Mozo Canete, John Doe 1-18, Insurance Companies A, B, C, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF)
A third amended complaint was filed in September 2023.
In February 2025, the parties agreed to participate in settlement negotiations and the case was referred to a magistrate judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. The court set a settlement conference for March 25.
The defendants then moved to disqualify plaintiffs’ counsel and for an order limiting discovery and a protective order.
Hearing Delayed
The court on March 7 ordered all the motions held in abeyance and ordered the plaintiffs to respond. On March 9, the plaintiffs responded to all three motions and on March 13 submitted a supplemental response to the motion for protective order.
On March 17, the defendants filed motions for leave to file replies. Those replies note that each of the responses included nonexistent case law or erroneous authorities and appeared to have been drafted by AI. The court granted leave to file the replies and issued an order to show cause to plaintiffs as to why they should not be sanctioned for violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, and Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1, Mod. R. Prof. C. 1.1
In an amended order to show cause filed on the docket March 19, Judge Raul M. Arias-Marxuach said his independent review of the responses revealed “multiple citations that are incorrect, do not contain the quotes or content cited to, and reference cases that cannot be located and thus presumably do not exist. While the use of generative artificial intelligence is not forbidden, attorneys have a duty of competence to their clients and a duty of candor to the tribunal.” Judge Arias-Marxuach gave the plaintiffs until March 25 to respond.
Meanwhile, the defendants filed their urgent joint motion to reschedule the settlement conference set for March 25. “Defendants remain committed to discussing in good faith the possibility of a
settlement in this case but, given the seriousness of the issues presented in these motions and the Joint Motion to Disqualify in particular, as well as in Plaintiffs’ pending response to the Court’s order to show cause, Defendants respectfully believe that it would not be fruitful, and indeed would be problematic to hold a settlement conference with Plaintiffs’ counsel whose disqualification and potentially sanctioning will be pending,” they tell the court.
In response, the plaintiffs say they agree that holding the settlement conference would be “problematic” and request that the court vacate the order and defer scheduling pending resolution of the motion to disqualify.
Counsel
CONCACAF is represented by Salvador J. Antonetti-Stutts and Aníbal A. Román-Medina of O’Neill & Borges LLC in San Juan and John J. Kuster, Jon Muenz and Amanda M. Blau of Sidley Austin LLP in New York.
FPF is represented by Edwin J. Seda-Fernández, Eric Pérez-Ochoa, Alexandra Casellas Cabrera and Andrés D. Santiago-López of Adsuar Muñiz Goyco Seda & Pérez-Ochoa PSC in San Juan.
FIFA is represented by Roberto A. Camara-Fuertes and Suleicka Tulier-Vazquez of Ferraiuoli LLC in San Juan and H. Christopher Boehning of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP in New York.
The plaintiffs are represented by Jose R. Olmo-Rodriquez in San Juan and Ibrahim Reyes of Reyes Lawyers PA in Coral Gables, Fla.
(Additional documents available: Defendants’ motion to disqualify counsel. Document #46-250402-026M. Defendants’ motion to stay discovery. Document #46-250402-027M. Defendants’ motion for protective order. Document #46-250402-028M. Defendants’ joint motion for protective order. Document #46-250402-029M. Plaintiffs’ response to motion to disqualify counsel. Document #46-250402-030B. Plaintiffs’ response to discovery motion. Document #46-250402-031B. Plaintiffs’ response to protective order. Document #46-250402-032B. Plaintiffs’ supplemental response. Document #46-250402-033B. Defendants’ reply on motion to disqualify. Document #46-250402-034B. Defendants’ reply on discovery. Document #46-250402-035B. Defendants’ reply on protective order. Document #46-250402-036B. Third amended complaint. Document #46-250402-025C.)