On June 12, 2012, the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) notified cyclist Lance Armstrong and other members of the USPS team of its opening of a formal action alleging violations under the (i) Union Cycliste International (UCI) Anti-Doping Rules, (ii) World Anti-Doping Code, and (iii) USADA Protocol for Olympic and Paralympic Movement Testing. (read the Notification here) USADA Allegations Specifically, USADA alleges that evidence in their possession “reflects a pervasive pattern of doping.” The Notification cites the following substances and methods: Erythropoitien (EPO). Used to increase the number of red blood cells. Blood Transfusions. Involve extraction of athlete’s own blood and re-infusion of that blood shortly before or during competition. Testosterone. Used to increase muscle mass and strength. Human Growth Hormone (hGH). Used to increase strength and lean muscle mass. Corticosteroids. Used to reduce inflammation and assist in recovery. Saline and Plasma Infusions. To prevent detection of EPO use or blood transfusions. The Notification alleges that Armstrong committed the following anti-doping violations with respect to the substances/methods above: use and/or attempted use, possession, trafficking, administration and/or attempted administration, assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up, and other complicity, and aggravating circumstances. USADA gave the respondents until June 22, 2012 to make a written submission before the Anti-Doping Review Board and clarified that the function of the Review Board is to recommend whether there is sufficient evidence of doping to proceed with the adjudication process. On June 29, the three-person Review Board made a unanimous recommendation to move forward with Armstrong’s adjudication process. Armstrong Doctors Banned for Anti-Doping Violations On July 10, USADA announced that Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral (cycling team doctor), Dr. Michele Ferrari (cycling team consulting doctor) and Jose “Pepe” Martí (cycling team trainer) have all received lifetime periods of ineligibility as the result of their anti-doping rule violations in the United States Postal Service (USPS) Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy. (read the announcement here) [UPDATE]: According to the Washington Post, on July 13, USADA confirmed that Armstrong’s coach Johan Bruyneel elected to contest his case in arbitration. (read more here) Deadline Extension On July 11, USADA granted Armstrong an extension of up to 30 days (the original deadline was July 14) to contest drug charges while the he challenges the case in federal court. If Armstrong doesn’t respond to doping charges before USADA prior to the end of the extension period and ask for an arbitration hearing to face the allegations, a lifetime ban from sports might go into place and he could face the loss of his Tour de France titles. Stay tuned! Related Posts: Lance Armstrong | The Doping Controversy Continues, Disputing, July 12, 2012

As readers may know, the controversy about Austin resident and seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong has resurfaced recently. USADA Charges The U.S. Anti Doping Agency (USADA) notified Armstrong and other members of the team on June 12, 2012 of its opening of a formal action alleging anti-doping rule violations. (read the notification here) On June 29, the three-person Anti-Doping Review Board made a unanimous recommendation to move forward with Armstrong’s adjudication process. Soon after, on July 10, the USADA announced that Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral (cycling team doctor), Dr. Michele Ferrari (cycling team consulting doctor) and Jose “Pepe” Martí (cycling team trainer) have all received lifetime periods of ineligibility as the result of their anti-doping rule violations in the United States Postal Service (USPS) Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy. (read more here) Armstrong’s Response On July 9, Armstrong filed a lawsuit and a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in the Western District of Texas in an attempt to shut down the USADA case. (read the Complaint and TRO ) However, six hours later, the Court dismissed (without prejudice) Armstrong’s suit in a strongly worded Order. The Court noted, “Contrary to Armstrong’s apparent belief, pleadings filed in the United States District Courts are not press releases, internet blogs, or pieces of investigative journalism.” (read the Order here) Armstrong was allowed to re-file an amended complaint within 20 days of the Court’s order which he did the next day. Armstrong’s Amended Complaint of July 10 contended that the USADA doesn’t have the right to force him to arbitrate without a valid arbitration agreement and the USADA tortiously interfered with his contract with Union Cycliste Internationale. Armstrong v. Tygart et al. , No. A-12-CA-606-SS. (read the July 10th Amended Complaint here). What’s Next? On July 11, the USADA granted Armstrong an extension of up to 30 days (the original deadline was July 14) to contest drug charges while the he challenges the case in federal court. If Armstrong doesn’t respond to doping charges before the USADA prior to the end of the extension period and ask for an arbitration hearing to face the allegations, a lifetime ban will go into place and he could face the loss of his Tour de France titles. Our upcoming posts will discuss the recent developments in detail. Stay tuned! Related Posts: Three doctors charged in Armstrong doping case, BBC, June 14, 2012 USADA Files Formal Charges Against Armstrong, ABC News, June 29, 2012 Lance Armstrong Suit to Dismiss Doping Case Thrown Out, ABC News, July 9, 2012 Lance Armstrong Faces Grim Endgame as His Doctors Are Banned for Doping, ABC News, July 10, 2012 Armstrong gets 30-day extension to answer doping charges, USA Today, July 12, 2012

The following bills relating to alternative dispute resolution were introduced by the 112nd U.S. Congress. The session convened in Washington, D.C. on January 3, 2011 and will end on January 3, 2013. Click on the bill number to read its text and on the status link to find the bill’s most recent legislative action. Bills that passed: Patent Reform Act of 2011 (a.k.a. America Invents Act). The Act provides, among other things that parties to a derivation proceeding may resolve the dispute via arbitration. See Section 135(f). H.R. 1249; Status. H.R. 1249 was signed by President Obama on Sept. 16, 2011 and became Public Law No. 112-29. Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011. Provides, among other things, that “None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be expended for any Federal contract for an amount in excess of $1,000,000 unless the contractor agrees not to—1) enter into any agreement with any of its employees or independent contractors that requires, as a condition of employment, that the employee or independent contractor agree to resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.” H.R.1473; Status. The Act was signed by the President on April 15, 2011 and became Public Law No. 112-10. Bills still pending: Consumer Mobile Fairness Act of 2011. The bill would amend title 9 of the United States Code to prohibit mandatory arbitration clauses in contracts for mobile service. S. 1652; Status. Disaster Recovery Act of 2011. The bill would create a dispute resolution program to facilitate an efficient recovery from major disasters. S. 1630; Status. Personal Data Protection and Breach Accountability Act of 2011. As introduced, the bill provides that “the rights and remedies afforded by this section shall not be abridged or precluded by any predispute arbitration agreement. S. 1535 IS; S. 1535 RS; Status. Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act. The bill would create an emergency jobs program during 2012 and 2013. The bill provides that each unit of general local government that is an entitlement community and each State that receives funding under the Act shall agree to the arbitration procedure described in the Act to resolve certain disputes. H.R. 2914; Status. American Specialty Agriculture Act. The Act would create a non-immigrant H-2C work visa program for agricultural workers and provides that any H-2C worker may, as a condition of employment with an employer, be subject to mandatory binding arbitration and mediation of any grievance relating to the employment relationship. H.R. 2847; Status. Arbitration Fairness Act of 2011. Declares that no predispute arbitration agreement shall be valid or enforceable if it requires arbitration of an employment, consumer, or civil rights dispute. S.987; Status. H.R.1873; Status. Lat year, the ABA sent a letter to the sponsors of the legislation expressing concerns regarding certain specific language in the bill that could inadvertently void existing international commercial arbitration agreements and potentially discourage international commercial parties from engaging in commerce with U.S. parties. Labor Relations First Contract Negotiations Act of 2011. Amends the National Labor Relations Act to require mediation and, if necessary, binding arbitration of initial contract negotiation disputes. H.R.129; Status. Surface Transportation Board Reauthorization Act of 2011. Certain appropriations for the Surface Transportation Board, including requiring the Board to establish a binding arbitration process to resolve rail rate, practice, and common carrier service disputes. S.158; Status. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Enhancement Act of 2011. “In the event of any dispute about an appropriate share or a fair method of determining an appropriate share of applicable costs of the testing requirements in a test order, any person involved in the dispute may initiate binding arbitration proceedings by requesting the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to appoint an arbitrator from the roster of arbitrators maintained by such Service or a hearing with a regional office of the American Arbitration Association.” H.R.553; Status. Non-Federal Employee Whistleblower Protection Act of 2011. It includes provisions on the nonenforceability of waivers and arbitration of disputes. S.241; Status. National Guard Technician Equity Act. Provides for a technician’s rights of grievance, arbitration, appeal, and review beyond the current stage of the adjutant general of the jurisdiction concerned. H.R.1169; Status. Postal Operations Sustainment and Transformation Act of 2011. Section 401 of the Act includes arbitration and labor dispute guidelines. S.1010; Status. Soledad Canyon High Desert, California Public Lands Conservation and Management Act of 2011. Advises the use of arbitration under Subchapter IV of chapter 5 of section 5 of the USC. S.759; Status. FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act of 2011. Requires the FAA Administrator and employee bargaining representatives, if their own negotiations and the services of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) have failed to lead to an agreement, to submit their controversy to the Federal Service Impasses Panel, subject to specified procedures, for binding arbitration. H.R.658; Status. S. 223; Status. Medical Care Access Protection Act of 2011 (MCAP Act). The limitations within the act apply to arbitration, and nothing in the act is meant to supersede arbitration. S.197; Status. Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2011. Provides that, “whether by arbitration or other means, in any health care lawsuit, the court shall supervise the arrangements for payment of damages to protect against conflicts of interest that may have the effect of reducing the amount of damages awarded that are actually paid to claimants.” S.1099; Status. S.218; Status. H.R.5; Status. U.S. Postal Service Improvements Act of 2011. Authorizes arbitration boards to consider the financial condition of the USPS in rendering decisions. S.353; Status. Preventing Homeowners from Foreclosure Act of 2011. Directs the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to implement a competitive grants program for states and local governmental entities to establish mediation programs to assist mortgagors under home mortgages facing foreclosure […]

by Holly Hayes We recently came across this Pew Project on Medical Liability that contains four detailed recommendations for healthcare professionals. The demonstration project for Pennsylvania titled “Medical Error Disclosure, Mediation Skills, and Malpractice Litigation” is authored by Carol B. Liebman and Chris Stern Hyman. The acknowledgement page thanks Bill Sage, now the Vice Provost for Health Affairs at the University of Texas Law School. The four recommendations include: Train Physicians to Communicate Better During Disclosure Conversations, Create a Consult Service of Communication Experts, Apologize When Appropriate and Use Mediation to Resolve Claims Promptly. The report includes a two-day training agenda for healthcare professionals titled “Communicating about Medical Error: Challenging Assumptions and Enhancing Skills. For more posts on enhancing patient/provider communication, see here and here. Holly Hayes is a mediator at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert where she focuses on mediation of health care disputes. Holly holds a B.A. from Southern Methodist University and a Masters in Health Administration from Duke University. She can be reached at holly@karlbayer.com.