Armstrong v. United States Anti-Doping Agency et al

Filing 17

ORDER DISMISSING 2 Motion for TRO. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (dm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION

F!!
2012JUL.9

ED
PH 2:45

tjos
LANCE ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff,
Case No. A-12-CA-606-SS

-vs-

TRAVIS TYGART, in his official capacity as
Chief Executive Officer of the United States AntiDoping Agency, and UNITED STATES ANTIDOPING AGENCY,
Defendants.

ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and
specifically Plaintiff Lance Armstrong's Complaint [#1], his Motion for Temporary Restraining

Order [#2], and his memorandum [#3] and exhibits [#4] in support thereof. Having reviewed the
documents, the relevant law, and the file as a whole, the Court now enters the following opinion and
orders DISMISSING Armstrong's complaint and motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that a plaintiff's complaint contain "short and

plain" statements of both the basis of the court' sjurisdiction, and the plaintiff's legal claim for relief.
Likewise, Rule 8(d)(1) states, "Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct." The Supreme
Court has recently held that "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to

'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)
(quoting Bell Atlantic Corp.

v.

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). Rule 8 prescribes a middle

ground of specificity, not requiring

" detailed factual allegations," but demanding "more than an

1

unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at
555). Thus, "a pleading that offers 'labels and conclusions' or 'a formulaic recitation of the elements

of a cause of action will not do," Id. (quoting

Twombly,

550 U.S. at 555), nor will a complaint rife

with argument and "other things that a pleader, aware of and faithful to the command of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, knows to be completely extraneous," Gordon v.
(5th Cir. 1979). Ultimately, what Rule

8

Green, 602

F.2d 743, 745

demands is a short and plain statement of detailedfacts,

not a mechanical recital of boilerplate allegations,

noras is more relevant herea lengthy and

bitter polemic against the named defendants.

Armstrong's complaint is far from short, spanning eighty pages and containing 261 numbered
paragraphs, many of which have multiple subparts. Worse, the bulk of these paragraphs contain

"allegations" that are wholly irrelevant to Armstrong's claimsand which, the Court must presume,
were included solely to increase media coverage of this case, and to incite public opinion against
Defendants.

See, e.g.,

Compl. [#1] ¶ 10 ("USADA's kangaroo court proceeding would violate due

process even if USADA had jurisdiction to pursue its charges against Mr. Armstrong.").1 Indeed,

vast swaths of the complaint could be removed entirely, and most of the remaining paragraphs
substantially reduced, without the loss of any legally relevant information.

Nor are Armstrong's claims "plain": although his causes of action are, thankfully, clearly
enumerated, the excessive preceding rhetoric makes it difficult to relate them to any particular factual

support. This Court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement,

Contrary to Armstrong's apparent belief, pleadings filed in the United States District Courts are not press
releases, internet blogs, or pieces of investigativej ournalism. All parties, and their lawyers, are expected to comply with
the rules of this Court, and face potential sanctions if they do not.
1

-2-

or vilification of Defendants, by sifting through eighty mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few

kernels of factual material relevant to his claims.
Accordingly, Armstrong's complaint, and his accompanying motion, are DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE, for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The
Court grants leave to amend, provided Armstrong can limit his pleadings to: (1) the basis for this

Court's jurisdiction; (2) the legal claims he is asserting; (3) against which Defendants each claim is
being made; (4) the factual allegations supporting each claim; (5) a brief statement of why such facts
give rise to the claim; (6) a statement of the relief sought; and (7) why his claims entitle him to such

relief 2 Armstrong is advised, in the strongest possible terms, and on pain of Rule

11

sanctions, to

omit any improper argument, rhetoric, or irrelevant material from his future pleadings.

Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff Lance Armstrong's Complaint [#11, and his Motion

for Temporary Restraining Order [#2], are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling;

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Armstrong shall file any amended complaint within
TWENTY (20) DAYS of entry of this order, or this case shall be closed and dismissed for
failure to prosecute, and for failure to comply with this Court's orders.

SIGNED this the

day of July 2012.

LI
SAM SPARKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2

Court expresses no opinion whether Armstrong actually has a legally cognizable claim against Defendants;

it concludes only that his current pleadings are insufficient under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
606 dism ord mjh.frm