defendant

Christian band Demon Hunter files trademark lawsuit against Netflix

Christian metal band Demon Hunter is suing Netflix, alleging trademark infringement associated with the streamer’s hit film “KPop Demon Hunters.”

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday by Hyde Lane, the corporate entity for Demon Hunter, against Netflix, Netflix Studios and AEG Presents, the live-entertainment division of AEG, with claims that the defendants have “created a substantial likelihood of confusion” among consumers.

The metalcore band — which was formed in 2000 out of Seattle by brothers Ryan and Don Clark — claims the success of the 2025 urban fantasy flick has “eclipse[d]” the group’s “established identity” and “commercial fate,” especially as plans for a KPop Demon Hunters global concert tour were announced in May in partnership with AEG Presents.

Hyde Lane originally trademarked “Demon Hunter” in 2014 under entertainment, namely live performances. To date, the band has released 12 studio albums and amassed more than 348,000 monthly listeners on Spotify. Several of its early music videos, including popular tracks like “Dead Flowers” and “Someone to Hate,” have garnered millions of views on YouTube.

In 2022, the company submitted other trademark protections for recorded music and merchandise.

By comparison, Netflix filed 10 applications under the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for “KPop Demon Hunters” for merchandise purposes starting in August 2025.

Hyde Lane has “been forced to surrender control over its commercial identity simply because Defendants have greater resources and a larger marketplace footprint,” the lawsuit states.

In the suit, the plaintiffs cite instances where there has been “consumer confusion.”

On Feb. 26, 2026, someone requested a refund after purchasing $500 tickets to a Demon Hunter show in Albany, N.Y., believing it was for a KPop Demon Hunters concert, according to the suit. “If I dont get it refunded I will not be able to purchase tickets to the actual ‘K pop demon hunters show,’” the email read.

On March 16, 2026, a producer from “Inside Edition” emailed Demon Hunter manager Ryan J. Downey to request an interview with songwriter Yu Han Lee (of KPop Demon Hunters) following the Oscar win for original song, the lawsuit states.

Additionally, the plaintiffs say the Christian band has been incorrectly tagged in connection to various KPop Demon Hunters content.

“Due to Defendants’ wrongful actions, Demon Hunter’s established identity is becoming increasingly obscured within recorded music, live touring and merchandise-related channels due to overlapping use by the KPop Demon Hunters brand,” the lawsuit states.

Hyde Lane is requesting Netflix and Netflix Studios be held liable for infringement, although no specified amount was listed in the suit.

The complaint arrives a year after the 2025 animated musical “KPop Demon Hunters” — which centered on Huntrix, a music trio who hunt demons — reached unprecedented heights, becoming Netflix’s most-watched animated original movie. Earlier this year, the film’s focus track, “Golden,” became the first K-pop song to win an Oscar.

Plans for the “KPop Demon Hunters” sequel are already underway as the lawsuit makes its way through the California court system.

Source link

Judge removed from Texas track meet stabbing case as defendant Karmelo Anthony seeks a new trial

The judge in the case of a Texas teenager convicted of fatally stabbing a 17-year-old athlete at a high school track meet was ordered removed Wednesday, as the defendant seeks a new trial in a case that drew national attention.

Karmelo Anthony, now 19, was convicted of murder and sentenced to 35 years in prison after a suburban Dallas jury in June rejected his claims of self-defense during a confrontation with Austin Metcalf in the stadium bleachers last year.

The case attracted national attention in part because of a flood of social media posts that amplified the killing in racial terms. Anthony is Black; Metcalf was white. Lawyers on both sides, however, told jurors the tragedy had nothing to do with race.

Dozens of Anthony supporters gathered inside and outside the Collin County courtroom for Wednesday’s hearing, and some chanted “Free Karmelo!” in the parking lot after visiting Judge Sid Harle’s order to remove state District Judge John Roach as Anthony seeks a retrial.

A new judge will be assigned for Thursday’s hearing on Anthony’s request for a retrial.

Anthony’s legal team argued Wednesday that a retrial is needed in part because Roach enforced overly strict courtroom rules and gave an interview after the trial was over.

In the interview that was played as Wednesday’s hearing began, Roach was asked if the jury got “it right.”

“Yeah, they did,” Roach said, adding: “Whatever they say, they got it right.”

Harle said he did not know Roach and he believed Roach would be fair in a hearing for a retrial. But Harle agreed to Anthony’s request to remove him because of the way it might look to a third party.

Anthony attended the hearing wearing a green jumpsuit. His parents and Metcalf’s parents also were in the courtroom. Attorneys for Anthony’s and Metcalf’s families did not immediately comment on the ruling.

Anthony did not testify during the trial where students described a heated exchange over Anthony’s refusal on a rainy spring day to leave a tent that belonged to Metcalf’s team. The teens went to different high schools.

Several schools were competing when Anthony sat under the Memorial High School tent that was perched in the bleachers. Austin Metcalf and others had repeatedly told Anthony to leave, witnesses testified, leading to an escalating confrontation.

Prosecutors said Anthony provoked Metcalf, and witnesses testified that Anthony was the aggressor.

Anthony at one point reached inside a bag and replied: “Touch me and see what happens,” according to a police report.

Metcalf pushed Anthony, according to witnesses, who said Anthony then pulled out a knife and stabbed him in the chest.

Stengle writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

U.S. charges 11 people in scheme to obtain green cards through sham marriages

The Department of Justice has charged nearly a dozen people with participating in a multimillion-dollar scheme to help hundreds of Chinese nationals fraudulently obtain green cards through sham marriages to U.S. citizens, officials said Wednesday.

American citizens were paid as much as $30,000 to enter into bogus marriages with immigrants seeking lawful permanent resident status as part of the scheme orchestrated from New York, according to court papers. The defendants charged up to $100,000 per green card, bringing in tens of millions of dollars over the course of the decadelong scheme, according to officials.

Authorities say they believe the group arranged more than 1,000 sham weddings, describing it as one of the largest marriage fraud prosecutions in U.S. history.

“This scheme was not a quick, fly-by-night operation but rather a yearslong, multibillion dollar cottage industry to criminally assist people who would not, or legally could not, otherwise become citizens of the United States,” Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche told reporters.

The charges come against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s restrictions on both legal and illegal immigration that have sought to crack down on who is able to enter the country or become a citizen.

After recruiting U.S. citizens, the defendants would arrange fake weddings and in some cases stage photos of families at places such as restaurants afterward to make them look legitimate, according to officials. The defendants would then help the immigrants through the lawful permanent status application process.

“These schemes have real cost. They rob our country of its ability to know who should be and who should not be allowed in America,” Blanche said.

The 11 defendants, including people accused of officiating the sham weddings, are charged in an indictment filed in New York. It was not immediately clear Wednesday whether they had lawyers to speak on their behalf.

Richer writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

KTLA-TV owner Nexstar violated court order, a federal judge finds

A federal judge blasted KTLA-TV Channel 5’s owner, the Texas-based Nexstar Media Group, on Thursday for violating a court order and for failing to disclose key information.

U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley found that Nexstar’s actions violated terms of an April preliminary injunction that was designed to prevent the media company from moving forward with its $6.2-billion takeover of rival TV station group Tegna Inc. and meddling with its management.

The judge called Nexstar’s actions “brazen.” He demanded the company begin submitting monthly reports and said a special master would be appointed to help manage the antitrust case and monitor Nexstar for compliance.

And Tegna’s recently constituted board — filled with high-level Nexstar officials — must be dissolved.

A Nexstar spokesman wasn’t immediately available for comment.

Nexstar unveiled its Tegna takeover a year ago. At the time, TV stations were lobbying the Federal Communications Commission to relax station ownership rules, a move that occurred Thursday in a split decision.

Last spring, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and seven other state attorneys general challenged Nexstar’s proposed acquisition, alleging the roll-up of more than 250 local TV stations would violate a U.S. antitrust law intended to protect consumers and competitive markets.

Bonta and other plaintiff states argued the consolidation would lead to local newsrooms shuttering, particularly in smaller markets, such as Sacramento and Indianapolis, where Nexstar would own multiple network affiliates.

Despite Bonta’s lawsuit, Nexstar hurried the next day to finalize its purchase of Virginia-based Tegna and swallow the operation. Tegna disbanded, its shareholders were paid and top Tegna executives exited.

Nunley, who is based in Sacramento, is overseeing the case. He initially issued a restraining order, followed by a more lengthy preliminary injunction that ordered Nexstar to halt its integration while the court case was pending.

Tegna should continue to operate as a separate business unit — free from the influence of Nexstar, the judge ruled.

But on the day that Nunley issued the restraining order, Nexstar formed a new Tegna board filled with Nexstar officers, including Chief Executive Perry Sook, Chief Financial Officer Lee Ann Gliha, and later Mike Biard, a former Fox executive who joined Nexstar in 2023 as chief operating officer.

Nexstar countered that while Nunley’s order said Nexstar employees were restricted from serving as “officers,” it didn’t expressly say they couldn’t serve on Tegna‘s board as “directors.”

“Defendants cannot convincingly argue that having Nexstar executives serve on TEGNA’s Board complies with the preliminary injunction,” Nunley wrote in Thursday’s order, adding that Nexstar’s position was “entirely disingenuous.”

Nexstar now must dissolve the board.

“It is shocking that Defendants think installing a Board of Directors comprised primarily of Nexstar executives would not create influence over Tegna management,” Nunley wrote.

He also admonished Nexstar for not providing that information in any of the hearings or in its filings with the court. “Defendants have a duty of candor to the Court under California Rule of Professional Conduct,” Nunley wrote.

His order was designed “to preserve Tegna as a separate and distinct, independently managed business unit from Nexstar,” Nunley wrote. “Nexstar’s control of the Tegna Board will undoubtedly allow it to influence Tegna’s management and obtain access to Tegna’s confidential information.”

Bonta, in a statement, said: “We thank the court for its attention to this matter and look forward to arguing our case and blocking this merger.”

Source link

Ex-Lakers Malik Beasley, Ed Davis charged with illegal sport gambling

Former Lakers Malik Beasley and Ed Davis were charged with wire fraud conspiracy and bribery in sporting contests by federal prosecutors in a sweeping indictment that included four other co-conspirators.

Both played one season with the Lakers during long careers, Beasley in 2022-23 and Davis in 2014-15.

According to the indictment, Beasley illegally manipulated his performance to ensure gamblers won prop bets two years before he played for the Lakers and one year after.

Davis — described in the indictment as Beasley’s “gatekeeper” — allegedly collaborated to manipulate Beasley’s performance when they were Minnesota Timberwolves teammates during the 2020-21 season and did so again four times during the 2023-24 season while Beasley was with the Milwaukee Bucks.

The illegal activity allegedly began during a Jan. 26, 2024 game between the Bucks and Cleveland Cavaliers. Beasley averaged 11.3 points that season and 11.7 during his career, but scored three points in that game.

In total, the defendants and their co-conspirators allegedly placed fraudulent wagers totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars on Beasley’s fixed performances.

Also indicted were NBA player agent Paolo Zamorano, William Brown, Robert Gorodetsky and Ernesto Plascencia. They are charged with wire fraud conspiracy, bribery in sporting contests and money laundering conspiracy for allegedly bribing Beasley to manipulate his performance. Zamorano was Davis’ agent.

Several of the defendants were arrested Monday.

“As alleged, the defendants turned professional basketball into a criminal betting operation, bribing then-NBA player Malik Beasley to fix his performance in multiple games in order to place fraudulent wagers, enrich themselves and cheat legitimate sportsbooks,” said Joseph Nocella Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. “Bribery and insider betting schemes like this one involving former NBA players and a current NBA player agent who exploited inside NBA information for profit erode the integrity of American sports and victimize the sports-watching public.”

Beasley, 29, has been under investigation for more than a year and sat out the 2025-26 season. The Detroit Pistons offered him a three-year, $42-million contract last offseason but rescinded it when informed by authorities that the nine-year veteran was suspected of participating in the illegal gambling scheme.

At first glance, neither player seemed to be vulnerable to bribes from gamblers. Beasley has made $59.2 million during his career, including a career-high $15.6 million with the Lakers. He averaged 11.1 points in 26 games that season.

Davis, 37, played for eight teams in 12 seasons before retiring in 2022 having made $47.2 million.

However, prosecutors allege that Beasley borrowed substantial sums from Davis to pay off gambling debts and attempted to repay him through the illegal activity. A year ago Beasley was successfully sued by his former agency for $2.5 million over a contract dispute. He also was sued for $6 million by South River Capital, a company that specializes in making loans to athletes.

“These defendants allegedly operated an illegal betting ring in an attempt to unlawfully earn hundreds of thousands of dollars,” said James C. Barnacle Jr., FBI Assistant Director in Charge. “As alleged, Malik Beasley allowed himself to be bought and altered his game-time performance to line pockets of Ed Davis and his other co-conspirators.”

Prosecutors also allege Beasley rigged his performance during three games with the Bucks in 2024 — a Feb. 27 game against the Charlotte Hornets, a March 10 game against the Clippers and a March 21 game against the Brooklyn Nets.

Five current or former NBA players have been indicted as part of the FBI investigation into illegal sports gambling and insider information trading. Veteran guard Terry Rozier is facing four charges, while former Lakers assistant coach Damon Jones and former Toronto Raptors center Jontay Porter have pleaded guilty to felony conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

The expansive gambling indictment also ensnared Hall of Fame player Chauncey Billups and several organized crime figures.

Source link

Arizona prosecutors dismisses fake elector case, seeks new indictment

Arizona Atty. Gen. Kris Mayes is dismissing a sprawling criminal case that alleged President Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and others tried to overturn Trump’s 2020 loss in the state.

The decision, announced Thursday, marks the third such fake elector case filed by states to be dismissed, though the Democratic attorney general is vowing to bring it back to a grand jury in hopes of securing another indictment.

The legal maneuver is aimed at getting around a Friday deadline for starting new grand jury proceedings after Mayes lost an appeal earlier this month. The appeal was filed after defense attorneys argued successfully that the original grand jury hadn’t been shown the relevant parts of a law that governs how presidential contests are certified.

Courts have dismissed similar cases in Michigan and Georgia, and a special prosecutor dropped a federal case in late 2024 that charged Trump with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. Those cases ended after Trump defeated Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. Cases related to the fake elector scheme remain in Nevada and Wisconsin.

The Nevada charges were dismissed in 2024 after a judge concluded Clark County, the state’s most populous county and home to Las Vegas, was the wrong venue for the case. Later that year, though, the case was refiled in Carson City, Nevada’s capital.

The Arizona case had been stalled for well over a year while Mayes pursued the appeal.

In Arizona, defense lawyers argued the law allowed for multiple slates of electors to be submitted to Congress in case the results were disputed. Federal law was amended in 2022 to specify that any given state could put forward only one slate of electors and that state governors are responsible for signing off.

Joe Biden won Arizona in 2020 by 10,457 votes.

The state attorney general has faced steep challenges in making her case.

It was filed nearly three and a half years after the 2020 election and levels complicated conspiracy charges against the 18 defendants. A dozen dismissal requests filed by defense attorneys have slowed progress in court.

The first judge on the case recused himself in late 2024 after an email surfaced in which he told fellow judges to speak out against attacks on Harris’ campaign for the presidency. The next judge ordered the case to be sent back to a grand jury.

Of the 18 Arizona defendants, two were former Trump aides, five were lawyers working for Trump and 11 were Republicans who submitted a document falsely claiming Trump won Arizona.

Three defendants have resolved their cases, including one who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge.

The rest pleaded not guilty. Some said they signed the certificate in case Trump won court challenges and a new slate of electors was needed urgently before Congress’ Jan. 6 deadline to tally votes.

The case has factored into Arizona’s attorney general race, where both Republican challengers to Mayes have publicly said they will dismiss the charges if they were elected to the post.

Billeaud writes for The Associated Press.

Source link

Bill to limit prison off-ramp for California’s mentally ill advancing

A bill to tighten California’s rules on mental health diversion — a process that allows certain criminal defendants to avoid prison for arrests linked to mental illness — is now on the verge of being signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Assembly Bill 46, authored by Stephanie Nguyen (D-Elk Grove), gives judges much wider discretion to decide whether a defendant should be eligible for diversion. Under the current law, judges must presume mental illness was a factor if a defendant with a legitimate diagnosis seeks diversion. In order to defeat a diversion request, the burden is on prosecutors to prove mental health issues were not a factor in the alleged crime.

The new measure — which moved through the state Senate with no opposition last month and is expected to clear the reconciliation process in the Assembly this week — also gives judges more latitude to block diversion if a defendant poses “a risk of danger to public safety,” as opposed to the higher “unreasonable risk” standard that was passed in 2018. Defendants charged with attempted murder will no longer be eligible for diversion under the new bill.

Proponents of more inclusive diversion policies argue that many people with mental health issues are locked up in California prisons and jails, where they are unable to receive the help they need.

The pending bill’s supporters say its changes are designed to address cases like that of Gilberto Guttierrez, a Los Angeles County man who has been accused of attacking his wife four times over the last 12 years.

In 2014, a misdemeanor domestic violence allegation landed Guttierrez on probation. Three years later, Guttierrez was ordered to take anger management classes after prosecutors brought felony domestic violence charges against him. Last February, prosecutors allege, he carried out a “brutal attack” on his wife with a glass bottle, leaving her with “extensive injuries,” according to a motion filed in his current criminal case. That time, the court filings show, Guttierrez threatened to kill her.

Despite objections from prosecutors and L.A. County probation officials, a judge granted a request to give Guttierrez mental health diversion last July.

A month later, prosecutors allege, he beat his wife until she fell into a coma.

When it passed in 2018, the original mental health diversion law was heralded as a needed off-ramp for defendants suffering from serious psychological issues — offering treatment to those who need it rather than a prison cell. But with voters statewide souring on progressive criminal justice reforms, lawmakers have sought to make it harder for defendants to qualify.

“AB 46 preserves diversion as an important pathway to care while ensuring judges have a clearer and more workable standard when serious public safety concerns are present,” Nguyen said in a statement last month.

Under the existing rules, defendants who successfully argue for pretrial mental health diversion spend two years undergoing a court-appointed treatment plan instead of facing a conviction. Prosecutors must prove the defendant is likely to commit a serious violent crime, a so-called “super strike,” again in order to block diversion.

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman, one of many prosecutors statewide who supported Nguyen’s bill, said that has been a nearly impossible standard to overcome.

“Guttierrez being your example: Judge, if you release him, he’s going to probably beat his wife up again, and if he does this time, he could kill her. But for the grace of God, he hasn’t killed her up until now,” Hochman said.

He added that due to the judge’s decision to grant diversion in Guttierrez’s case, “you have three little kids who likely won’t have their mom for the rest of their life.”

A spokesperson for Newsom did not respond to a request for comment about his plans for the legislation.

A 2020 Rand Corporation study found 61% of the nearly 5,500 mentally ill inmates housed in Los Angeles County at that time were “likely appropriate candidates” for diversion.

But a number of troubling incidents have led to pushback against the existing diversion law.

In a letter supporting Nguyen’s bill, the California District Attorneys Assn. rattled off a list of cases in which prosecutors say the law’s shortcomings had deadly consequences. They pointed to a case in Sacramento where a defendant stabbed a 40-year-old man to death after he was granted diversion in a robbery case. In Santa Clara, the letter said, a woman on mental health diversion for carjacking proceeded to steal another car and slam it into an outside table at a restaurant, leaving one person dead and others injured.

Nikhil Ramnaney, a former federal prosecutor who now works as a defense attorney in Southern California, said thousands of people benefit from mental health diversion every year without reoffending and chastised the bill’s supporters for cherry-picking horrible — but rare — cases to muster support for their proposal.

“This is their most effective strategy because it works. Pick up the most visceral, outrageous anecdotes and then repeat them and amplify them as much as possible,” he said. “That’s how we get bad policy.”

Defense attorney Alexandra Kazarian said California politicians are repeating age-old mistakes of trying to arrest their way out of a mental health crisis.

“Without this option, you throw them into prison for a couple of years, they get out, and nothing changes. I’ve seen real change in my clients who have been granted these and who have just been on horrific mental health breaks and who, two years later, fully have their lives together,” she said. “You’re always going to be able to find an outlier. You’re always going to be able to find somebody who ruins what is a great project or program.”

Hochman said the modified mental health diversion law is a “rebalancing” of the scales in California after years of attempts to lower the state’s overcrowded jail populations affected public safety.

“In the end, I’m not looking for pendulum swings,” he said. “I think we did have a pendulum swing when these laws were being passed and people weren’t really discussing, or at least understanding, the public safety impact of laws that seem on their surface to be very — I wouldn’t even use the word ‘progressive,’ but very helpful to people who are suffering.”

Source link

NBA probe of Steve Ballmer, Clippers nears end with Sanberg sentencing

The sentencing of Aspiration co-founder Joseph Sanberg to 14 years in federal prison on Monday brings the NBA a step closer to concluding its nine-month investigation into the Clippers allegedly circumventing the salary cap.

Sanberg pleaded guilty in October to federal charges of conspiring to bilk investors out of $248 million for portraying the now-defunct Aspiration as a “socially-conscious and sustainable banking services and investment products” firm.

The NBA has declined to comment on the status of the probe centered on $60 million invested in Aspiration by Clippers owner Steve Ballmer and the $28-million contract Clippers star Kawhi Leonard signed with Aspiration for endorsement and marketing work that he never delivered.

Players are allowed to have separate endorsement and other business deals, but at issue is whether the Clippers participated in arranging the side deal beyond simply introducing Aspiration executives to Leonard. Doing so would be a violation of Article 13 of the NBA collective bargaining agreement, punishable by a $4.5-million fine, the loss of a first-round draft pick and the voiding of Leonard’s contract.

The NBA draft takes place June 23-24 and the Clippers have three picks, including the fifth overall selection. The league is not expected to release its findings until after the NBA Finals, which begin Wednesday between the New York Knicks and San Antonio Spurs.

Clippers officials haven’t commented on the investigation. But Leonard, who has one year left on a three-year, $149.5-million contract that will pay him $50.3 million next season, told The Athletic after the Clippers’ season-ending game April 15 that “I think we’re going to be in the clear. I’m not stressing.”

Otherwise, among the few public comments about the investigation were letters submitted to federal court judge Stephen V. Wilson ahead of Sanberg’s sentencing by Ballmer and the law firm conducting the probe on behalf of the NBA.

The letter from Dave Anders of Wachtell Lipton stated that Sanberg provided documentation and information helpful to the NBA investigation during two in-person interviews.

“In all our dealings with Mr. Sanberg, both directly and through his counsel, he provided information that was consistent with our review of contemporaneous documents and other evidence,” Anders wrote. “Mr. Sanberg’s cooperation substantially assisted our investigation, including our ability to develop a more complete understanding of key events.”

Ballmer countered by asking Wilson for a stiff sentence in a five-page Victim Impact Statement posted on social media by his lawyer, David N. Kelley.

“Sanberg continues to exploit his fraud of Mr. Ballmer for his benefit, providing information to the NBA in return for a sentencing letter that the league submitted on his behalf,” Kelley wrote. “The reliability of Sanberg’s information is suspect given that he has pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges, and the government has made its own determination that he is not credible.”

Before handing down the sentence, Wilson made it clear that Sanberg’s credibility was questionable.

“He portrays himself as a do-gooder who was in business to help the world, but he did personally gain from his fraud,” Wilson said, later adding, “I would put the grade of his fraud at the zenith.”

Ballmer, a former longtime CEO of Microsoft who has owned the Clippers since 2014, accused Sanberg of targeting him for his well-known interest in environmental sustainability and exaggerating their relationship to convince others to invest in the fraudulent company. He said he met Sanberg only once.

Ballmer invested $50 million in Aspiration in September 2021. A month later, the Clippers announced a $300-million sponsorship deal with the company. Ballmer nearly granted Aspiration naming rights to the team’s new $2-billion venue as well, but instead chose financial services firm Intuit. Ballmer made an additional $10-million investment in Aspiration on March 9, 2023.

Ballmer was added in November as a defendant in a civil lawsuit against Sanberg and several others associated with Aspiration. Ballmer and the other defendants are accused by 11 investors in Aspiration of fraud and aiding and abetting fraud, with the plaintiffs seeking at least $50 million in damages.

Kelley contended that Ballmer was added as a defendant because of his “visibility and resources,” and portrayed the Clippers owner as a victim, saying “Mr. Ballmer’s losses are not measured solely, or even primarily, on a balance sheet. They are measured in the reputational damage that will take years to remediate, and in the chilling effect on future endeavors intended to do good.”

The lone public comment about the investigation from NBA Commissioner Adam Silver came during All-Star Weekend in February at the Intuit Dome when he described the issue as “enormously complex.”

“You have a company in bankruptcy, you have thousands of documents, multiple witnesses that needed to be interviewed,” Silver said.

The investigation was triggered by reports from podcaster Pablo Torre that Leonard’s sponsorship deal with Aspiration was to circumvent the salary cap. Torre and the staff of “Pablo Torre Finds Out” won a Pulitzer Prize for Audio Reporting for their efforts.

Source link