MLW Media LLC v. World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.

Background

MLW Media LLC brought claims against World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. under the Sherman Antitrust Act, for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, for intentional interference with contractual relations, and under California’s Unfair Competition Law. WWE filed an answer containing 14 affirmative defenses. MLW moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) to strike those defenses.

WWE opposed the motion and alternatively asked the court to terminate it as moot and allow WWE to file an amended answer attached to its opposition.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that Rule 12(f) allows a court to strike an insufficient defense or material that is redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous. The court also noted that courts in the district generally apply the pleading standard from Twombly and Iqbal to affirmative defenses, and that permission to amend should generally be given when doing so would not prejudice the moving party.

The court found that WWE’s proposed amended answer cured nearly all of the deficiencies identified by MLW. The amended answer removed affirmative defenses 1, 2, 5, 8, and 12 because they merely attempted to show that MLW had not met its burden of proof. It also added facts sufficient to plausibly support affirmative defenses 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9.

The court found two portions of the proposed amended answer improper. The sixth affirmative defense, for unjust enrichment, concerned damages and was reserved for the remedies stage. The court also found that the “Reservation of Rights” section was not itself a defense and served no real purpose in the litigation.

Disposition

The court TERMINATED MLW’s motion to strike as moot and GRANTED WWE’s request to file its amended answer, on the condition that WWE remove the sixth affirmative defense for unjust enrichment and the “Reservation of Rights” section. The opinion does not state that the underlying claims were decided by this order.