International Swimming League, Ltd v. World Aquatics

Background

The court issued this order after a November 18, 2025 pretrial conference. It addressed motions in limine, which are requests to decide before trial what evidence or arguments may be presented, along with sealing requests, witness-list issues, remote testimony, and trial logistics.

Plaintiff’s Motions in Limine

The court denied International Swimming League, Ltd.’s motion to limit Paul K. Meyer’s testimony. It found that Meyer was providing proper rebuttal testimony.

The court granted in part and denied in part the motion concerning Konstantin Grigorishin’s Russian or other foreign sanctions and criminal convictions. The court granted the motion to the extent it sought to prevent use of that information as propensity evidence—evidence offered to suggest that a person acted consistently with an alleged character trait. The court denied the motion to the extent it sought to prohibit World Aquatics from using the information to show why World Aquatics and third parties may not have wanted to work with International Swimming League, Ltd. The parties were ordered to work together on how much detail would be presented to the jury.

The court denied the motion concerning whether International Swimming League, Ltd. lacked standing to pursue damages because funds flowed through related entities, insofar as the motion sought to exclude evidence about the ownership of supposed sponsors. The court held in abeyance the portion concerning expenses incurred by other entities, pending supplemental briefing. International Swimming League, Ltd. was directed to file its brief by December 2, 2025, and World Aquatics was directed to respond by December 16, 2025.

Defendant’s Motions in Limine

The court denied World Aquatics’ motion to exclude the testimony of Dr. Daniel Rascher concerning anticompetitive effects. Dr. Rascher could testify consistently with, but not beyond, his report, to the extent his testimony was relevant to an issue in the case.

The court denied World Aquatics’ motion to exclude evidence about European Commission proceedings involving the International Skating Union to the extent the evidence was relevant to World Aquatics’ intent and to World Aquatics’ and alleged co-conspirators’ understanding of the effect of General Rule 4. The parties were directed to meet and confer about the evidence and any appropriate limiting instruction.

The court denied World Aquatics’ motion to exclude evidence about other third-party entities and aquatics competitions to the extent International Swimming League, Ltd. sought to use that evidence for non-propensity purposes, such as showing knowledge, intent, or a pattern of conduct.

The court denied World Aquatics’ motion to exclude evidence or argument that it threatened swimmers. The court noted that International Swimming League, Ltd. did not intend to introduce the specifically identified interrogatory responses from Katinka Hosszu.

Sealing Motions

The court denied three administrative motions seeking to consider whether information designated as confidential by Wasserman, USA Swimming, and the Shields plaintiffs should be sealed. The court stated that those designating parties had not responded with reasons supporting continued sealing.

Witnesses and Testimony

The court struck Cyndi Gallagher from International Swimming League, Ltd.’s witness list because she had been disclosed late and the court was not persuaded that the late disclosure was justified or harmless.

The court denied International Swimming League, Ltd.’s unopposed administrative motion requesting an order that U.S. Customs and Border Protection grant Konstantin Grigorishin temporary admission to the United States to testify at trial.

The court granted International Swimming League, Ltd.’s request for Artem Nitz to testify by live video because he could not leave Ukraine due to possible conscription and World Aquatics did not object. The court held in abeyance the request for Grigorishin to testify by video, pending evidence that he had applied for and been denied a visa to enter the United States.

Trial Logistics

The order set jury selection to begin on January 12, 2026, and established a schedule for trial days, voir dire, peremptory challenges, jury questionnaires, breaks, and counsel’s arrival. Each side was allocated 14 hours for direct and cross-examination and 45 minutes for opening statements. The court stated that closing-statement time limits would be disclosed later.

The order disposed of Docket Nos. 483, 484, 485, 487, 489, 491, 492, 493, 495, and 496.