GM Hikaru Nakamura filed a movement within the Eastern District of Missouri to dismiss GM Hans Niemann‘s lawsuit on December 7. This is the most recent improvement within the defamation lawsuit that has obtained nationwide consideration, filed in late October. Chess.com, GM Magnus Carlsen, and IM Daniel Rensch filed their respective motions to dismiss the earlier week.

The 15-page doc argues that the court docket doesn’t have private jurisdiction over Defendant Nakamura, who resides in Florida and made feedback on-line, within the state of Missouri. It additional argues that the entire claims are “wholly faulty” and must be dismissed and that Nakamura must be “awarded his lawyer’s charges and prices.”

The first roughly seven pages (Part A) of the Argument give attention to the non-public jurisdiction of the Missouri court docket over Nakamura. It succinctly states: “Indeed, Plaintiff doesn’t—and can’t—plead any information demonstrating the existence of private jurisdiction in Missouri over Mr. Nakamura.”

It provides: “Indeed, Mr. Nakamura will not be talked about till the fifth web page of the Amended Complaint, and solely sparsely thereafter. Plaintiff asserts that his relationship with Mr. Nakamura has been ‘acrimonious’ for ‘a number of years.'”

A prolonged rationalization of Missouri’s long-arm statute, which may lengthen “jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant,” concludes with: “Missouri’s long-arm statute doesn’t attain Mr. Nakamura on this case.” The doc asserts Nakamura was not in Missouri when he expressed his opinions on-line and didn’t take part within the Sinequfield Cup, surmising that the state can’t have private jurisdiction over the Defendant.

In addition, citing the “effects test” of Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783 (1984), the next assertion is made: “Plaintiff doesn’t and can’t allege that Mr. Nakamura, a world chess character (see Am. Compl., Doc. 20, ¶¶ 54-55), by some means acted in a approach uniquely aimed toward Missouri and knowingly precipitated the brunt of any supposed hurt in Ml Defendants.”

In Part B of the Argument, with regard to Plaintiff Niemann’s antitrust allegations of “a violation of the Sherman Act by all Defendants,” the claims are dismissed.  It cites Hurley v. National Basketball Players Association: “The court docket had little problem rejecting the Sherman Act declare” in that earlier occasion.

It provides: “Plaintiff doesn’t and can’t allege that Mr. Nakamura controls some undefined market in such a approach that might trigger an antitrust violation.”

Citing Carlsen’s movement to dismiss from final week: “Plaintiff’s Counts I, II, IV, and V must be dismissed pursuant to Connecticut’s anti-SLAPP regulation,” including that Nakamura must be “awarded his attorneys’ charges and prices.”

Finally, the Argument rejects all claims. “Plaintiff fails to determine particularly which of Mr. Nakamura’s alleged statements kind the premise of his claims.” The doc goes on to record six alleged statements by Nakamura, writing that “Plaintiff was required to, however didn’t, plausibly allege precise malice,” together with:

“Mr. Nakamura’s alleged re-Tweeting of a Tweet from Twitter from an account named
‘Unsubstantiated Chess Rumors’ (id., ¶ 99) will not be an actionable assertion of truth—the
Twitter account re-Tweeted was fairly actually named Unsubstantiated Chess Rumors.”

The last paragraph of the argument states: “Plaintiff has not adequately alleged that Mr. Nakamura had information of the purported contracts or enterprise expectations with which he supposedly interfered.”

Niemann’s defamation lawsuit seeks at the very least $100 million in damages towards every of the defendants: Carlsen, Nakamura, Chess.com, the Play Magnus Group, and Rensch. What has develop into the chess world’s largest scandal in recent times has gripped the neighborhood for the reason that Sinquefield Cup in September 2022, with extra developments absolutely nonetheless to come back.

Previous protection: