The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss Lance Armstrongs federal lawsuit seeking to prevent the drug-fighting organization from pursuing doping charges against him.
The motion filed Thursday in Austin, Texas, cites the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, which gives USADA jurisdiction over athletes who compete in Olympic sports.
It also includes a 2005 affidavit from USADA chief executive officer Travis Tygart stating Armstrong took part in USADAs testing program and was under its jurisdiction the opposite claim Armstrong is making in the current case.
The affidavit helped bolster Armstrongs claims in a lawsuit against SCA Promotions, which refused to pay bonus money to the Tour de France winner because of allegations he used performance-enhancing drugs.
That affidavit also states Armstrong passed 12 doping tests. Armstrong claims he never has tested positive. USADAs current case against him, which could cost him his seven Tour de France titles, is a nonanalytical case based on evidence other than positive doping tests.
In a statement sent out early Friday morning, Armstrongs attorney, Robert Luskin, said USADAs motion is wrong on the law, and we will respond.
The motion confirms the salient point that Mr. Armstrong has passed every drug test administered by USADA itself in its anytime, anywhere 24-7-365 program, which it swore was the most stringent testing program in the world, Luskin said.
Tygart released a statement Thursday night discussing the motion to dismiss and restating some of what he has said in response to Armstrongs claims that USADA is unfairly targeting him.
Were we not to bring this case, we would be complicit in covering up evidence of doping and failing to do our job on behalf of those we are charged with protecting, Tygart said.
On July 9, Armstrong filed and a judge quickly threw out a lawsuit seeking to stop USADA from pursuing its case.
Armstrongs attorneys called the USADA hearing procedure a kangaroo court and said the USADA filing was a testament to USADAs brazenness and callous disregard for its own mission that it seeks to strip Mr. Armstrong of his lifes work.
In dismissing the case, the judge criticized Armstrong for grandstanding and using it as a publicity stunt; Armstrongs attorneys responded by refiling a shorter version of the same lawsuit.
Meantime, USADA granted Armstrong an extension through Aug. 13 to decide whether he wants to take the charges to arbitration, the next step in the anti-doping adjudication process that Armstrong is trying to avoid with the lawsuit.
The USADA motion to dismiss includes 30 entries detailing what it said are unsupported factual statements in the Armstrong lawsuit.