PICKERINGTON, Ohio -- Paradama Productions, Inc., d/b/a AMA Pro Racing, announced today that a hearing date has been set in federal district court for its case against Clear Channel Motorsports. The hearing, scheduled for December 17, will ...
PICKERINGTON, Ohio -- Paradama Productions, Inc., d/b/a AMA Pro Racing, announced today that a hearing date has been set in federal district court for its case against Clear Channel Motorsports.
The hearing, scheduled for December 17, will consider AMA Pro Racing's request for an injunction, pending arbitration, to enforce the Supercross Sanctioning Agreement signed by both parties in March. In order for Federal District Court Judge James L. Graham to grant an injunction, he will have to consider the likelihood of success based on the merits of AMA Pro Racing's case.
"We're confident in our case and look forward to obtaining an injunction in court," said Scott Hollingsworth, CEO of AMA Pro Racing. "From comments recently made by Clear Channel Motorsports, it's obvious to me that they are in favor of allowing the FIM (Federation Internationale de Motocyclisme) into the AMA Supercross Series in the role of a sanctioning body. Not only would this violate our agreement, it is not in the best interests of the series. One only need look at the recent debacle of the Motocross of Nations to see what that could lead to."
Clear Channel Motorsports issued a statement last week indicating that the case was between AMA Pro Racing and the FIM, and did not involve Clear Channel. "That is incorrect," said Hollingsworth. "This case absolutely involves Clear Channel. Our contract with Clear Channel Motorsports recognizes AMA Pro Racing's exclusive sanctioning rights to the series."
When AMA Pro Racing objected to the FIM, it threatened the AMA with expulsion, even though neither the FIM nor the AMA are parties to AMA Pro Racing's contract with Clear Channel.
"After our extraordinarily successful management of the AMA Supercross Series for 29 consecutive years, we will not accept being summarily edged aside," Hollingsworth added. "The behavior of Clear Channel is unacceptable, and we are asking the court to force the company to uphold its contractual responsibilities."