NASCAR has asked for the expedited discovery motion filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports to be denied.
The 22-page response to the motion was filed by NASCAR on Wednesday. In asking for the motion to be denied, NASCAR claims it is a one-sided, non-reciprocal request for relief more akin to a motion to compel.
NASCAR, in its response to the plaintiffs’ motion, opens by saying, “Plaintiffs have filed a meritless suit against NASCAR alleging baseless antitrust claims in order to obtain commercial agreements they previously rejected, and to attempt to extort more favorable contract terms.” The commercial agreements would be the 2025 Charter Agreement the two organizations did not sign, which NASCAR goes on to say is no longer available.
It also says, “The deadline for Plaintiffs to sign 2025 Charter Agreements expired weeks ago, and NASCAR has taken steps, consistent with its contractual obligations to other Charter Teams, to plan for a season with only 32 Charters. Plaintiffs do not need these Charter Agreements to race, and indeed have stated publicly that they will be racing in NASCAR regardless.”
[lawrence-auto-related count=3 category=1428]
23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have plans to field three full-time chartered entries next season. It would be an expansion for both organizations, which are fielding two cars. The additional charter for each would come from Stewart-Haas Racing, which is shutting down.
The two organizations filed a motion for expedited discovery with its preliminary injunction request on Oct. 9. As the antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR proceeds, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports want to race as charter teams in 2025.
In the motion for expedited discovery, the organizations asked to receive immediate access to documents and files discussing the mandatory release provision in the 2025 Charter Agreement; documents discussing NASCAR’s decision to end negotiating with the Team Negotiating Committee and only negotiate with individual racing teams for the 2025 Charter Agreement; and documents discussing NASCAR’s decision to present to the teams a take-it-or-leave-it final proposal for the 2025 Charter Agreement.
“Plaintiffs’ overreaching requests belie their true aim: to use the antitrust discovery process as a weapon,” NASCAR’s filing claims. In turn, NASCAR laid out four arguments: the plaintiffs fail to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable harm; plaintiffs’ expansive requests are not narrowly tailored to the preliminary injunction; the plaintiffs do not identify any information that is at risk of destruction; the procedural posture and timing of plaintiffs’ motion do not support expedited discovery.
However, if the court rules in favor of the expedited discovery motion, NASCAR has asked that the discovery be reciprocal and limited to non-privileged documents that are directly related to the issue raised in the preliminary injunction request.