united states district court eastern district ......2019/09/16 · 11. defendant kranos corporation...

1 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

HOBART-MAYFIELD, INC. d/b/a MAYFIELD ATHLETICS, Case No. v Hon. NATIONAL OPERATING COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS FOR ATHLETIC EQUIPMENT, DEMAND FOR KRANOS CORPORATION d/b/a SCHUTT JURY TRIAL SPORTS, RIDDELL, INC., XENITH, LLC, GREGG HARTLEY, in his capacity as Vice President of the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment, MICHAEL OLIVER, in his Capacity as Executive Director/Legal Counsel of the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment, VINCENT LONG, in his capacity as Engineering Manager of Schutt Sports, and KYLE LAMSON, in his capacity as Director of New Product Innovation of Xenith, LLC, Defendants. JAMES F. HEWSON (P27127) DIANE L. HEWSON (P44628) LYNN B. SHOLANDER (P78839) Hewson & Van Hellemont, P.C. Attorneys for Mayfield Athletics 25900 Greenfield Road Suite 650 Oak Park, MI 48237 (248) 968-5200/(248) 968-5270 fax

COMPLAINT

PLAINTIFF HOBART-MAYFIELD, INC. d/b/a MAYFIELD ATHLETICS,

Case 2:19-cv-12712-GAD-EAS ECF No. 1 filed 09/16/19 PageID.1 of 68

2 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

by and through its attorneys, HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT, P.C., hereby

submits the following Complaint against the NATIONAL OPERATING

COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS FOR ATHLETIC EQUIPMENT; KRANOS

CORPORATION d/b/a SCHUTT SPORTS; RIDDELL, INC.; XENITH, LLC;

GREGG HARTLEY, in his capacity as Vice President of the National Operating

Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment; MICHAEL OLIVER, in his

Capacity as Executive Director/Legal Counsel of the National Operating Committee

on Standards for Athletic Equipment; VINCENT LONG, in his capacity as

Engineering Manager of Kranos Corporation d/b/a Schutt Sports; and KYLE

LAMSON, in his capacity as Director of New Product Innovation of Xenith, LLC.

I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

1. In recent years, Plaintiff Hobart-Mayfield, Inc., d/b/a Mayfield

Athletics (hereinafter referred to as “Mayfield Athletics”) has attempted to widely

market, distribute, and sell the S.A.F.E.Clip,1 an aftermarket, add-on product for

football helmets that has been proven to reduce g-force impact by as much as 35%

per hit.

2. During this period, the nation’s leading helmet manufacturers and

the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment

(hereinafter referred to as “NOCSAE”) have made overt and veiled efforts to

1 S.A.F.E. is an acronym for “shock absorbing football equipment.”


3 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

interfere with or otherwise impede Mayfield Athletics’ attempts to market, sell, and

distribute its product, which has the potential to reduce the g-force impacts

experienced by millions of football players throughout the United States.

3. In recent months, Mayfield Athletics has been informed by other

manufacturers of aftermarket or add-on products for football helmets that its

experiences are not isolated. To the contrary, the facts and circumstances reveal a

concerted effort by the nation’s leading helmet manufacturers and NOCSAE to

exclude aftermarket or add-on products from the national market for football safety

equipment and accessories.

4. As set forth below, Mayfield Athletics has been significantly harmed

by Defendants’ efforts to exclude aftermarket or add-on products from the market.

More importantly, however, American consumers have been significantly harmed

by Defendants’ anticompetitive conduct and interference, in that football players,

football teams, and related consumers have been deterred or prevented from

purchasing products that have the potential of dramatically reducing the g-force

impacts sustained by players while participating in the sport.

5. Mayfield Athletics has attempted to educate and work with the helmet

manufacturers and NOCSAE, hoping that they would terminate their unlawful and

harmful representations and conduct without judicial intervention. None of the

Defendants have altered their positions or conduct in response to Mayfield


4 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

Athletics’ efforts.

6. Accordingly, Mayfield Athletics brings this lawsuit to (1) stop the

unlawful representations and conduct of the nation’s leading helmet manufacturers

and NOCSAE, and thereby (2) ensure that the S.A.F.E.Clip and other aftermarket

or add-on products with the potential to improve football players’ well-being are

widely available for purchase and use by football players and teams throughout the

country.

II. THE PARTIES

7. Plaintiff Hobart-Mayfield, Inc., d/b/a Mayfield Athletics, is

incorporated and headquartered in Michigan.

8. Defendant NOCSAE, a self-appointed nonprofit corporation that

develops standards for athletic equipment, is incorporated in Missouri, with its

principal place of business in Overland Park, Kansas.

9. Mayfield Athletics is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that

at all times herein mentioned Defendants Gregg Hartley and Michael Oliver were

agents of NOCSAE and, in doing the things alleged in this complaint, were acting

in the scope of such agency and with the permission and consent of NOCSAE.


currently unnamed Defendants DOE 1 through DOE 25 were agents of NOCSAE

at all times herein mentioned and, in doing the things alleged in this Complaint,


5 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

were acting in the scope of such agency and with the permission and consent of

NOCSAE.

11. Defendant Kranos Corporation d/b/a Schutt Sports, a corporation that

manufactures football helmets (among other things), is incorporated in Delaware,

with its principal place of business in Illinois. In the interest of clarity and brevity,

Kranos Corporation will be referred to as “Schutt Sports” in this complaint.


at all times herein mentioned Defendant Vincent Long was an agent of Schutt

Sports and, in doing the things alleged in this Complaint, was acting in the scope

of such agency and with the permission and consent of Schutt Sports.


currently unnamed Defendants DOE 26 through DOE 50 were agents of Schutt

Sports at all times herein mentioned and, in doing the things alleged in this

Complaint, were acting in the scope of such agency and with the permission and

consent of Schutt Sports.

14. Defendant Riddell, Inc., a corporation that manufactures football

helmets (among other things), is incorporated and headquartered in Illinois. In the

interest of clarity and brevity, Riddell, Inc., will be referred to as “Riddell” in this

complaint.



6 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

at all times herein mentioned currently unnamed Defendants DOE 51 through DOE

75 were agents of Riddell and, in doing the things alleged in this Complaint, were

acting in the scope of such agency and with the permission and consent of Riddell.

16. Defendant Xenith, LLC, a limited liability company that

manufactures football helmets (among other things), is registered in Delaware and

headquartered in Michigan. In the interest of clarity and brevity, Xenith, LLC, will

be referred to as “Xenith” in this complaint.


Defendant Kyle Lamson was an agent of Xenith at all times herein mentioned and,

in doing the things alleged in this Complaint, was acting in the scope of such agency

and with the permission and consent of Xenith.


currently unnamed Defendants DOE 76 through DOE 100 were agents of Xenith at

all times herein mentioned and, in doing the things alleged in this Complaint, were

acting in the scope of such agency and with the permission and consent of Xenith.

19. Upon information and belief, Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith

together enjoy more than 90% of the national football helmet market.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

20. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1337 because Mayfield Athletics’ claims arise, in


7 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

part, under the Sherman Antitrust Act (“the Sherman Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.

21. This Court also has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15

U.S.C. §§ 4, 15, and 25, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337(a), because this Complaint

is brought, in part, under the Clayton Antitrust Act to prevent and restrain

Defendants’ violations of the federal antitrust laws.

22. This Court has supplemental subject matter jurisdiction over the

subject matter of the claims brought under the laws of the State of Michigan

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because those claims are so closely related to

Mayfield Athletics’ federal antitrust claims that they constitute part of the same

case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution.

23. This Court has personal jurisdiction over all of the defendants named

in this complaint by operation of the federal antitrust laws and general federal law

governing personal jurisdiction.

24. Venue is proper in this Court under 15 U.S.C. § 22 and 28 U.S.C. §

1391(b)(2) because, inter alia, a substantial part of the events, acts, or omissions

giving rise to the claims alleged in this complaint occurred within, or were directed

at, this judicial district.

IV. EFFECT ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE

25. As alleged below, Defendants have engaged, and continue to engage,

in violations of antitrust and tort law that have been within the flow of, and have


8 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

substantially affected, interstate trade and commerce.

26. The conduct, statements, and representations made by NOCSAE,

Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith, through their agents, employees, and/or

representatives, have been undertaken as part of a nationwide strategy directed by,

and for the benefit of, each of the defendants. If not enjoined, the practices of

NOCSAE, Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith will impede the flow of interstate

commerce by precluding the sale of most, if not all, aftermarket and/or add-on

products intended for use on football helmets.

27. The statements, conduct, and practices of NOCSAE, Riddell, Schutt

Sports, and Xenith have affected the national market for football safety equipment

and have specifically and concretely damaged Mayfield Athletics by rendering it

largely impossible for Mayfield Athletics to sell the S.A.F.E.Clip to football players

at all levels of play in the United States.

28. The practices of NOCSAE, Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith have

also specifically and concretely damaged other aftermarket or add-on product

manufacturers who are similarly situated to Mayfield Athletics.

V. COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Mayfield Athletics’ S.A.F.E.Clip

29. Mayfield Athletics was originally established in 2014 to conceptualize

and design a unique football helmet shock absorber (later named the


9 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

“S.A.F.E.Clip”).

30. The S.A.F.E.Clip is installed on football helmets to attach the facemask

to the helmet. It can be retrofitted to most existing helmets and facemasks.

31. Unlike typical facemask clips—which are static and do not absorb

force—the S.A.F.E.Clip contains a Sorbothane insert, which causes the S.A.F.E.Clip

to absorb and reduce the impact forces to the head each time a football player is hit.

32. The S.A.F.E.Clip received fully patented status in 2017

(P#9750298B2).

33. Mayfield Athletics has a second patent application related to the

S.A.F.E.Clip that is currently pending.

34. Between 2016 and 2018, several generations of the S.A.F.E.Clip were

extensively tested and refined.

35. Each round of testing was performed at an independent third-party

laboratory adhering to NOCSAE standards for new football helmets.

36. The most recent testing revealed that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip resulted

in force reductions as high as 35% per hit.

37. Mayfield Athletics has attempted to widely market, distribute, and sell

the S.A.F.E.Clip to individual consumers, sports teams, and retailers, among others.

38. Mayfield Athletics also has attempted to establish business

relationships with Schutt Sports, Riddell, and Xenith, with the hope that the nation’s


10 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

leading helmet manufacturers will (1) utilize the S.A.F.E.Clip as their preferred

facemask attachment device, (2) offer the S.A.F.E.Clip as an add-on product for

purchase, and/or (3) permit the use of the S.A.F.E.Clip as an approved product for

reconditioning, thereby increasing the efficacy and utility of the football helmets

sold and used throughout the United States.

Organization and Operation of the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment and the Safety Equipment Institute

39. NOCSAE holds itself out as an independent, nonprofit body that

“develops voluntary performance and test standards for athletic equipment that are

available for adoption by any athletic regulatory body.” (NOCSAE FAQs, Exhibit

A.)

40. The Safety Equipment Institute (SEI) manages the certification of

athletic equipment to NOCSAE standards.

41. On its website, SEI holds itself out as “a private, nonprofit organization

established in 1981 to administer the first non-governmental, third-party certification

program to test for public safety, and certify a broad range of safety equipment

products.” (SEI Company Overview, Exhibit B.)

42. The majority of football regulatory bodies in the United States only

permit football players to participate in the sport if they are using football helmets

and facemasks that meet NOCSAE standards.

a. Upon information and belief, the National Federation of High School


11 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

Football Rules Book requires that all players wear “[a] helmet and face

mask which met the NOCSAE standard at the time of manufacture.”

The Rules Book further provides, “All players shall wear helmets that

carry a warning label regarding the risk of injury and a manufacturer’s

or reconditioner’s certification indicating satisfaction of NOCSAE

standards. All such reconditioned helmets shall show recertification to

indicate satisfaction with the NOCSAE standard.”

b. Upon information and belief, the Football Rules Book promulgated by

the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) requires all

players to use football helmets that meet NOCSAE standards.

c. Upon information and belief, the National Football League (“NFL”)

requires players in the league to wear football helmets that meet

NOCSAE standards.

d. Upon information and belief, USA Football requires all players to wear

helmets that meet NOCSAE standards.

e. Upon information and belief, the International Federation of American

Football requires all players to wear helmets that meet NOCSAE

standards.

f. Upon information and belief, youth football leagues frequently

incorporate by reference the National Federation of High School


12 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

Football Rules Book and thereby require that all football helmets used

by players bear the requisite certification that the helmets satisfy

NOCSAE standards.

g. Upon information and belief, many youth football leagues otherwise

require that all football helmets used by players bear the requisite

certification of satisfying NOCSAE standards.

43. Other entities—such as the United States Center for Disease Control

and Prevention—expressly recommend that the public rely on NOCSAE standards

and a manufacturer’s certification that its product meets NOCSAE standards in

selecting and purchasing a football helmet.

44. Football helmet manufacturers routinely invoke or rely on their

compliance with NOCSAE standards in defending against lawsuits brought by

injured players.

45. In light of the foregoing, it is clear that NOCSAE possesses significant

power and authority in the realm of American football, and that standards and

representations made by NOCSAE directly influence and significantly affect the

entirety of the football equipment industry.

46. Additionally, as a result of NOCSAE’s self-appointed power and

influence, pieces of equipment that do not meet NOCSAE standards, and pieces of

equipment as to which no NOCSAE standard exists, are largely excluded from the


13 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

national market for football safety equipment and accessories.

47. NOCSAE and SEI are both funded primarily through revenue

generated from equipment manufacturers in exchange for product certification and

licensure, including the use of trademarked NOCSAE and SEI logos and phrases on

qualifying products.

48. Under this relationship, NOCSAE enters into licensing agreements

with the manufacturers of sports equipment, which incorporate a “License Fee

Schedule” under which equipment manufacturers are charged, and NOCSAE

receives, a fee for each unit of product sold that includes the trademarked NOCSAE

logo(s) or phrase(s) on (1) the product itself, (2) its packaging, (3) its instructions,

(4) its product documentation, or (5) its marketing materials.

49. Under this arrangement, NOCSAE’s financial viability is directly

dependent on its relationship with, and the success of, sports equipment

manufacturers, including Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith.

50. Upon information and belief, employees, agents, and/or representatives

of the leading helmet manufacturers (including Riddell, Schutt Sports, and/or

Xenith), or individuals closely related to those companies, are current or former

members of the NOCSAE Standards Committee and/or exhibit significant influence

over the NOCSAE Standards Committee.



14 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

of the leading helmet manufacturers (including Riddell, Schutt Sports, and/or


members of the NOCSAE board of directors and/or exhibit significant influence

over the NOCSAE board of directors.

NOCSAE’s Unlawful Conduct, Statements, and Representations

52. One of the testing standards established by NOCSAE is a “Severity

Index” for evaluating football helmets.

53. NOCSAE’s use of and statements regarding the Severity Index suggest

that NOCSAE is setting reliable standards for the manufacture and use of football

helmets.

54. SEI allegedly conducts testing to certify that football helmets are within

the permissible range of the Severity Index established by NOCSAE.

55. NOCSAE’s own publications concerning the Severity Index confirm

that the standard is illusory and, in fact, provides no meaningful information

regarding the safety of a particular football helmet model, especially in relation to

preventing injuries (NOCSAE Severity Index FAQs, Exhibit C; Football Helmet

Standards Overview, Exhibit D).

56. For example, NOCSAE’s “Severity Index FAQs” states:

The SI number is a cutoff point for head injury probability overall. There is no measurable difference in safety of helmets with scores below the 1200 SI threshold. For example, a helmet scoring 400 SI isn’t more likely to


15 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

reduce injury than one scoring 800 SI. Once the SI value gets below approximately 800 to 900, the change to the risk of injury is essentially immeasurable. Because of the very strict and demanding quality control and quality assurance requirements specified in the NOCSAE standard, helmets certified to the NOCSAE standard will test substantially below 1200 SI, typically in the 400 to 600 SI range.

* * *

SI figures can be misleading when it comes to helmet performance. . . . A single football helmet model has potentially 29 different and separate SI values generated by a single certification test, and the numbers for that helmet model will vary from other helmets of the same model, and even from the same production line.

* * *

No football helmet can prevent concussions. Because the SI units are not concussion specific, it is impossible to compare the scores of one helmet with another and determine which helmet provides better protection. Variables such as the helmet, the condition and integrity of the padding and energy attenuation systems inside the helmet, the current health and concussion history of the player wearing the helmet, and the athlete’s style of play with regard to the use of the head are far more related to the likelihood of concussion than are differences in SI values from one helmet to the next. [Exhibit C (emphasis added).]

57. NOCSAE’s website also states the following regarding the wide

variability of the Severity Index:

There is no single SI number for any single helmet or model. A helmet model in any given size alone may have over 10,000 different SI scores from all samples tested, depending on the number of helmets produced.


16 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

NOCSAE does not allow SI-related safety claims about one model or brand over another because such claims would be scientifically unfounded and misleading to consumers. [NOCSAE FAQs, Exhibit A (emphasis added).]

58. NOCSAE has promulgated Standard ND087 17m17c, which describes

the test and performance requirements that are required for football facemasks to

qualify for NOCSAE certification.

59. However, NOCSAE has not created standards for testing the safety and

efficacy of the S.A.F.E.Clip or any other facemask attachment device.

60. On July 16, 2013, NOCSAE issued a press release entitled “NOCSAE

statement on third party helmet add-on products and certification.” (Exhibit E.)

Among other things, the press release definitively stated that the addition of after-

market products to a helmet “voids the certification of compliance with the

NOCSAE standard”:

There are many new products on the market that are intended to be added to helmets, in particular football helmets, which products claim to reduce concussions and make helmets safer and more protective. Whether these are additional liners or padding on the inside, or bumpers, pads, coverings or electronic devices that attach to the outside of the helmet, these products were not included in the certification testing and quality control programs that are required for all helmets that are certified to the NOCSAE standards. To address this situation, and to protect the integrity of the NOCSAE standards, the NOCSAE board of directors has adopted the following position:

“NOCSAE helmet standards are specific to models which are identical in all aspects, except as to size. The testing required to support the certification is also specific to the model being certified. NOCSAE standards require that


17 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

any change in configuration, padding, shell geometry, or protective system requires a new model designation with separate certification testing. The addition of after-market items by anyone that changes or alters the protective system by adding or deleting protective padding to the inside or outside of the helmet, or which changes or alters the geometry of the shell or adds mass to the helmet, whether temporary or permanent, voids the certification of compliance with the NOCSAE standard.” [Emphasis added.]

61. Approximately three weeks later, NOCSAE issued a second press

release entitled “Certification to NOCSAE Standards and Add-On Helmet Products”

(Exhibit F), which clarified its position as to whether the use of an aftermarket or

add-on product may void a helmet’s certification of compliance with NOCSAE

standards. In relevant part, the press release stated:

• NOCSAE itself does not certify any product, it does not “approve” or “disapprove” of any product, and has no authority to grant exemptions or waivers to the requirements imposed by the standards it writes.

• The addition of an item(s) to a helmet previously certified without those item(s) creates a new untested model. Whether the add-on product changes the performance or not, the helmet model with the add-on product is no longer “identical in every aspect” to the one originally certified by the manufacturer.

• When this happens, the manufacturer which made the original certification has the right, under the NOCSAE standards, to declare its certification void. It also can decide to engage in additional certification testing of the new model and certify the new model with the add-on product, but it is not required to do so.


18 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

• Companies which make add-on products for football helmets have the right to make their own certification of compliance with the NOCSAE standards on a helmet model, but when that is done, the certification and responsibility for the helmet/third-party product combination would become theirs, (not the helmet manufacturer). That certification would be subject to the same obligations applicable to the original helmet manufacturer regarding certification testing, quality control and quality assurance and licensure with NOCSAE.

• Products such as skull caps, headbands, mouth guards, ear inserts or other items that are not attached or incorporated in some way into the helmet are not the types of products that create a new model as defined in the NOCSAE standards and are not items which change the model definition.” [Emphasis added.]

62. In reliance on NOCSAE’s public representations, Mayfield Athletics

extensively tested the S.A.F.E.Clip to independently certify that use of the

S.A.F.E.Clip complied with NOCSAE standards.

63. Prior to 2018, NOCSAE was aware of Mayfield Athletics’ development

and marketing of the S.A.F.E.Clip as an aftermarket add-on product for football

helmets via communications between Mayfield Athletics and Defendant Michael

Oliver. Upon information and belief, NOCSAE may have been aware of Mayfield

Athletics’ development and marketing of the S.A.F.E.Clip through other avenues as

well.

64. On May 8, 2018—after Mayfield Athletics had subjected the

S.A.F.E.Clip to extensive testing and had begun marketing the S.A.F.E.Clip to


19 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

individual consumers, football teams, and national helmet manufacturers—

NOCSAE published a press release entitled “Certification to NOCSAE Standards

and Add-On Helmet Products” (Exhibit G), which revised its previous position on

add-on helmet products, stating as follows:

• NOCSAE, itself, does not certify any product, it does not “approve” or “disapprove” of any product, and has no authority to grant exemptions or waivers to the requirements imposed by the standards it writes.

• The addition of an item(s) to a helmet previously certified without the item(s) creates a new untested model. Whether the add-on product improves the performance or not, the helmet model with the add-on product is no longer “identical in every aspect” to the one originally certified by the manufacturer.

• When this happens, the helmet manufacturer has the right, under the NOCSAE standards, to declare its certification void. It may elect to allow the certification to remain unaffected, or it may also decide to engage in additional certification testing of the new model and certify the new model with the add-on product, but it is not required to do so.

• Products such as skull caps, headbands, mouth guards, ear inserts or other items that are not attached or incorporated in some way into the helmet are not the types of products that create a new model as defined in the NOCSAE standards, and are not items which change the model definition. [Emphasis added.]

65. In sum, the May 2018 press release (1) omitted the provision that

previously permitted add-on product manufacturers to make their own certification

of compliance with NOCSAE standards and (2) expressly clarified that helmet


20 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

manufacturers may, at their sole discretion, void their certifications, allow their

certifications to remain unaffected, or engage in additional certification testing

whenever add-on products are used with their products.

66. NOCSAE’s website currently includes the following statement, which

expressly discourages the use of helmet add-on products:

Helmets should not be altered. Add-on accessories can change a helmet and interfere with performance in ways unintended by the manufacturer. The helmet’s original padding, fit and components were tested for compliance with the NOCSAE standards, and altering these components may result in a helmet that does not perform as designed, and could increase the risk of injury. A manufacturer can declare a product’s certification to the NOCSAE standard void if its product is altered. [NOCSAE FAQs, Exhibit A (emphasis added).]

67. NOCSAE’s website further states the following regarding whether “a

helmet which bears the NOCSAE seal [can] be altered or repaired without legal

ramifications,” which further discourages the use of helmet add-on products:

A helmet should not be altered. Any change or modification in the configuration of the shell or liner materials from manufacturing specifications could substantially alter the performance of the helmet as a unit, causing a change in helmet performance, and possibly exposing the individual responsible to liability. Individual helmet models are certified in the condition and configuration in which they were manufactured, and any alteration, modification, or change from the manufacturing specifications could affect the model’s performance on the NOCSAE certification test. By following proper installation procedures and using replacement parts which meet or exceed original manufacturer specifications, skilled repair of a football helmet should not affect the integrity of the energy attenuation system. It is suggested that the manufacturer be consulted before any materials are applied to the helmet such as, but not limited to, paint, wax, thinners, solvents,


21 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

vinyl tape designs, cleaning agents, etc. [NOCSAE FAQs, Exhibit A (emphasis added).]

68. Paradoxically, NOCSAE’s website also states that brand-name

replacement parts are not required when helmets are reconditioned:

The NOCSAE standard is not brand specific. Neither the test nor the performance standard call for any specific brands, materials or designs. The standard speaks only to the performance of the helmet when new, and recertification. The standard does not require the use of original equipment parts, but does require that “all components must function as originally certified” which requires OEM equivalence. [NOCSAE FAQs, Exhibit A (emphasis added).] 69. NOCSAE’s public statements have effectively abrogated any

foundation for concluding that a helmet’s purported certification to NOCSAE

standards has any meaning or comports with any identifiable standards.

70. Despite continuing to hold itself out as an independent entity that

creates objective, science-based standards for equipment safety, NOCSAE has ceded

this duty to the same manufacturers that market their products as being certified to

NOCSAE standards.

71. NOCSAE’s statements and positions have empowered helmet

manufacturers to operate as third-party gatekeepers for aftermarket or add-on

products in the national market for football safety equipment and accessories.

72. In addition, NOCSAE has directly discouraged the use of helmet add-

on products, while also claiming that “it does not ‘approve’ or ‘disapprove’ of any

product[.]”


22 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

73. In August 2018, NOCSAE Vice President Gregg Hartley made several

statements regarding Mayfield Athletics’ ability to sell and market the S.A.F.E.Clip.

He confirmed that NOCSAE has not established a standard for mounting hardware,

including facemask attachment hardware, on a football helmet. However, after

acknowledging that there is “no standard” for mounting hardware, Mr. Hartley stated

that if the S.A.F.E.Clip were offered for sale separately from a “faceguard system,”

NOCSAE would, “if asked,” “have to declare it not certified.” Mr. Hartley also

confirmed that the maker of a facemask or helmet retains the option of voiding a

certification that its product meets NOCSAE standards in the event that after-market

hardware (like the S.A.F.E.Clip) is used with the helmet or facemask.

74. In sum, NOCSAE has publicly and privately taken the position that a

helmet manufacturer is in complete control of whether an aftermarket or add-on

product can be added to a helmet and whether use of an aftermarket or add-on

product will affect a helmet’s certification to NOCSAE standards.

75. Despite taking this position, NOCSAE continues to publicly and

privately maintain that facemask attachment hardware is not certified and cannot be

certified given the lack of NOCSAE standards for such hardware.

76. On October 2, 2018, Mayfield Athletics’ counsel sent written

correspondence to NOCSAE requesting discussion and clarification regarding the

inconsistent and confusing public representations made by NOCSAE and the leading


23 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

helmet manufacturers (Exhibit H).

77. NOCSAE never responded to Mayfield Athletics’ October 2018 letter.

78. Through its representations, and illusory authority and influence,

NOCSAE has supported large-scale helmet manufacturers and denied access to the

marketplace for aftermarket or add-on products that improve the efficacy and

performance of a football helmet.

79. NOCSAE has established an illusory structure under which it holds

itself out as an “independent” entity “with the sole mission to enhance athletic safety

through scientific research and the creation of performance standards for athletic

equipment.” However, in reality, manufacturers of athletic equipment pay

thousands of dollars to NOCSAE and SEI in order to obtain certification that their

products meet NOCSAE’s standards. In reality, however, the “certification” has no

practical meaning or significance and is easily manipulated by the manufacturer after

the certification is obtained.

80. The system created and maintained by NOCSAE creates a closed group

of football helmet manufacturers (including Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith) that

pay vast sums of money to NOSCAE and SEI in order obtain certification that their

products meet NOCSAE standards.

81. The helmet manufacturers then leverage that “certification” through

their licensing agreements with NOCSAE, which permit them to utilize and rely on


24 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

NOCSAE’s trademarked logos and phrases and thereby establish and maintain a

monopoly on the market for football safety equipment and accessories, to the

exclusion of manufacturers of aftermarket or add-on products (given that the

majority of football regulatory bodies only permit the use of helmets that meet

NOCSAE standards).

The Leading Helmet Manufacturers’ Unlawful Conduct, Statements, and Representations in Relation to

the S.A.F.E.Clip and Other Aftermarket Products

82. Mayfield Athletics has encountered extensive interference from

NOCSAE and other entities, including leading football helmet manufacturers (i.e.,

Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith), during its attempts to market, distribute, and sell

the S.A.F.E.Clip, despite the demonstrated efficacy of the S.A.F.E.Clip.

83. Schutt Sports, Riddell, and Xenith have repeatedly and publicly warned

customers—through websites, publications, and direct statements made by

individual sales personnel and management members—that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip

with their helmets would be illegal and/or would violate their respective helmet

warranties. These representations are contrary to federal law. See 15 U.S.C.

2302(c); 15 U.S.C. 2310; 16 C.FR. 700.10.

84. Schutt Sports, Riddell, and Xenith have repeatedly and publicly warned

customers—through websites, publications, and direct statements made by

individual sales personnel and management members—that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip


25 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

with their helmets would void the helmets’ certification to NOCSAE standards.

85. On August 17, 2018, Riddell issued a “Response to Address

Aftermarket Accessories and NOCSAE Certification,” stating as follows:

Football helmets and face masks worn by professional, collegiate, high school and most youth football players are required to meet National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) performance standards. NOCSAE certification is conducted by Safety Equipment Institute (SEI), an ISO 17065 conformity assessment organization. The certification process involves rigorous internal product testing, independent laboratory testing and a sound quality assurance program. Each helmet and face mask model is certified by SEI to meet NOCSAE performance standards. The certification is void if the helmet or face mask is modified in any way. Riddell recommends against the use of any third party aftermarket accessories that alter the fit, form or function of the helmet or face mask as such modifications void the NOCSAE certification and render the helmet or face mask illegal for most organized play. [Exhibit I (emphasis added).]

86. Riddell’s helmet warranty is published on its website. It states:

The warranty on helmet shells is five (5) years for polycarbonate varsity helmets and three (3) years for ABS youth helmets from the original date of purchase, provided there has been normal use and proper maintenance. It is recommended that your helmet be reconditioned every year by a Riddell Factory Authorized Reconditioner. Proper maintenance requires reconditioning of your helmet at least every two (2) years by a NOCSAE Licensed Reconditioner using only new factory replacement liners in the reconditioning process. Evidence of any of the following conditions will operate to void this warranty: 1) Failure to have the helmet reconditioned at least every two (2) years by a NOCSAE Licensed Reconditioner. 2) Installation of used parts instead of new parts whenever a liner replacement is necessary. 3) Where shells have been damaged by a chemical reaction from the use of incompatible materials such as: a. Attachment of a


26 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

guard, face mask or component of another manufacturer or mismatched material. b. Use of cleaners, waxes or paints of another manufacturer or failure to follow recommended cleaning and painting instructions. 4) Excessive drilling of holes or drilling of any new holes less than ½” from each other or the edge of the shell. 5) Abusive treatments or any use other than the playing of American football. 6) Removal of, or obliteration of, the Warranty label, date code or warning labels. Varsity and youth football helmet component parts are warranted to be free of defects in material and workmanship for a period of one (1) year provided there has been normal use and proper maintenance. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, expressed or implied, whether Statutory or otherwise, including any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose. Manufacturer shall not be liable for any consequential damages resulting from the use of its products. Products covered by these warranties should be returned to the manufacturer, along with evidence of the date of purchase. [Exhibit J (emphasis added).]

87. Xenith’s helmet warranty is published on its website. It states:

Xenith warrants helmet shells to be free from defects in material and workmanship for a period of five (5) years from date of shipment for all varsity and youth polycarbonate shells and for a period of three (3) years from date of shipment for youth abs shells. The assembled liner (including the interior liner, all shock absorbers, jaw plates and hook/loop attachments) are warranted for a period of two (2) years from the date of shipment; comfort pads are warranted for one (1) year only. If, during the warranty period, the helmet shell and/or liner fail in the course of normal use due to material defect, dealer, (not other parties having physical possession of the equipment) shall notify Xenith and request a return authorization. The defective unit shall then be returned to Xenith's repair center by dealer, freight prepaid, with a failure report along with the place and dates of reconditioning. It will either be repaired or replaced, at Xenith's option, and returned to dealer or its designate, freight prepaid. Duties, tariffs and transportation insurance associated with such return shall be dealer's responsibility. The foregoing warranty shall not apply


27 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

to defects resulting from: 1) improper or inadequate maintenance by dealer or its customers; or, 2) unauthorized modification, misuse or accidents. Dealer may replace worn components (facemasks, facemask clips, snap buckles, chin straps, chin cups) with only Xenith approved replacement parts. Dealer shall inform its customers that Xenith recommends: 1) annual reconditioning of each helmet by a Xenith authorized reconditioner and that failure to do so may adversely affect the performance of the helmet; 2) that helmets be retired from service not later than ten (10) years after initial use; and 3) that shock absorbers should never be swapped from its original location to another within the interior liner (see shock absorber alteration warning below.) This warranty shall be void as a result of any of the following: 1) repairs or alterations made to a helmet which modify or alter the helmet including the removal of any warning labels. 2) use of helmet replacement parts other than Xenith approved replacement parts. 3) the application of any unapproved device or material to the helmet. 4) failure to use a Xenith authorized helmet reconditioner. (a list of authorized reconditioners as of the effective date is attached to this agreement; an updated list may be obtained from Xenith’s customer service department or at www.Xenith.com.) 5) failure to recondition the helmet at least once every two (2) years. Warranty exclusions: except as noted, the following components are not warranted: chin pieces, low and high chin straps, snap buckles, facemasks, facemask clips, and fastening hardware including but not limited to t-nuts, screws and snaps. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Xenith warrants the hybrid strap and chin cup assemblies for one (1) year. Shock absorber alteration warning: Xenith uses several types of shock absorbers in every football helmet. Each type of shock absorber is designed differently and strategically placed in the interior liner to achieve the desired performance. Shock absorbers may not be interchanged or swapped from one location to another. Altering the shock absorber configuration could


28 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

adversely affect the performance of the helmet. Xenith disclaims any responsibility or liability resulting from unauthorized alteration of the shock absorber configuration. Dealer may only replace worn or damaged jaw and crown shock absorbers on football helmets with identical Xenith replacement parts. [Exhibit K (emphasis added).]

88. Schutt Sports publishes warranty information on its website. It states,

in relevant part:

Football Helmet Warranty For complete details on the helmet warranty, warnings and helmet care be sure to review the football helmet fitting guide that can be found on this website. Important — Warranty -— Performance You may replace or change any part or component of the Schutt Helmet System as long as you follow the manufacturer’s guidelines. However, alterations, additions or any component deletions or removals you make to the helmet may void this warranty and could adversely affect the protective capabilities of the helmet. Should there ever be any question regarding the warranty, evaluation or function of a helmet and/or the component parts, please contact Schutt Sports for a free helmet inspection. . . . Use of Third Party and After-Market Products on Schutt Products All Schutt helmets and faceguards are manufactured and certified to meet the current NOCSAE performance standards. Alterations, additions or any component deletions or removals made to the helmet or faceguard that do not follow the manufacturer’s guidelines may void any applicable warranty to the product and will void the NOCSAE certification of the helmet and faceguard. Schutt Sports recommends against the use of any third party, aftermarket product or accessory that alters the fit, form or function of the helmet or faceguard. Third party, aftermarket products that are used on a Schutt helmet and do not follow manufacturer’s guidelines will void the NOCSAE certification and make the helmet or face mask illegal to use in most organized football leagues, games or other activities. [Exhibit L (emphasis added).]

89. The helmet manufacturers’ representations that the use of aftermarket


29 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

products would void the applicable warranties and/or render the helmets illegal to

use are deceptive and patently false, as a manufacturer cannot limit its warranty

based on the use of an aftermarket or add-on product pursuant to the Magnuson-

Moss Act. See 15 U.S.C. 2302(c); 15 U.S.C. 2310; 16 C.FR. 700.10.

90. The helmet manufacturers’ representations that the use of aftermarket

products would “void the NOCSAE certification” are deceptive and patently false,

as NOCSAE has expressly and repeatedly stated that it “itself does not certify any

product” and “it does not ‘approve’ or ‘disapprove’ of any product[.]” Instead, it

purports to merely “develop[] voluntary performance and test standards for athletic

equipment[.]”

91. Agents, employees, and/or representatives of Schutt Sports, Riddell,

and Xenith have made false statements that appear directly intended to interfere with

the marketing, distribution, and sale of the products that Mayfield Athletics has

created.

92. In particular, agents, employees, and/or representatives of Schutt

Sports, Riddell, and Xenith have made express statements to Mayfield Athletics, as

well as prospective clients or customers of Mayfield Athletics, that installing the

S.A.F.E.Clip on a football helmet (1) would void the warranty for helmets

manufactured by Schutt Sports, Riddell, and Xenith and (2) would void “the

NOCSAE certification” of a particular helmet or faceguard.


30 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

93. For example, one or more agents, employees, and/or representatives of

Schutt Sports told dealers at the Sports, Inc., show on June 18, 2019, in Columbus,

Ohio, that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip on a Schutt Sports helmet would void the helmet’s

warranty.

94. Subsequently, Sports, Inc., dealers have declined to purchase

S.A.F.E.Clips because of the statements made by Schutt Sports representatives at

Sports, Inc., events.

95. The effect of Defendants’ statements and representations on Mayfield

Athletics’ potential sales is significant, as Sports, Inc., is a sporting goods buying

organization with more than 500 members and 750 sales locations throughout all 50

states and Canada.

96. Bob Fawley, President of Capital Varsity Sports, based in Oxford,

Ohio, stated that he would “love” to sell the S.A.F.E.Clip, but he cannot offer

S.A.F.E.Clips in the reconditioner market unless and until they are approved by the

helmet manufacturers, and he cannot risk his business (by utilizing or offering the

S.A.F.E.Clip) until that occurs.

97. The effect of Defendants’ statements and representations on Mayfield

Athletics’ potential sales is significant, as Capital Varsity Sports is a Team Sports

Dealer and Sporting Goods Equipment Reconditioner, which reconditions and sells

sports equipment throughout Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky.


31 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

98. Jeff Lester spoke to a representative named Erin from Riddell’s

marketing department during a Detroit Lions Event at Pontiac High School on July

25, 2019, regarding the use of the S.A.F.E.Clip on Riddell football helmets. Erin

informed Mr. Lester that using the S.A.F.E.Clip on a Riddell helmet would violate

the helmet’s warranty.

99. The equipment manager of Brookfield Central High School in

Brookfield, Wisconsin, asked the Riddell representative for the high school about

the installation of S.A.F.E.Clips on Riddell helmets. The representative informed

him that Riddell would no longer “cover the insurance” in the event of an injury.

Joel Nellis, the head coach of the Brookfield Central High School football team,

subsequently contacted Mayfield Athletics and noted that Riddell’s statements

regarding liability in the event of an injury might be an issue that could limit sales

of the S.A.F.E.Clip, even though the S.A.F.E.Clip “seem[s] like a very useful

product.”

100. Consistent with Defendants’ public and private statements and

representations, Rob Sgarlata, head coach of the Georgetown University Hoyas,

expressly told Mayfield Athletics in June 2019 that he will not use a product on a

helmet unless it originates from that helmet’s manufacturer.

101. The representations made by NOCSAE, Schutt Sports, Riddell, and

Xenith have already precluded Mayfield Athletics from selling S.A.F.E.Clips and


32 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

will continue to preclude Mayfield Athletics from selling its product in the future

unless Defendants’ conduct is enjoined.

102. Agents, employees, and/or representatives of NOCSAE, Riddell,

Schutt Sports, and Xenith have made direct statements to agents, employees, and/or

representatives of Mayfield Athletics that further reflect an intent to exclude

Mayfield Athletics from the national market for football safety equipment and

accessories, or otherwise ensure that Mayfield Athletics is unable to market or sell

the S.A.F.E.Clip.

103. Agents, employees, and/or representatives of NOCSAE, Riddell,

Schutt Sports, and Xenith have made verbal and written statements confirming that

the helmet manufacturers and NOCSAE have worked in combination and taken

action in opposition to the marketing, sale, and use of aftermarket add-on products,

including Mayfield Athletics’ S.A.F.E.Clip.

104. By way of example, Vincent Long, Engineering Manager of Schutt

Sports, expressly stated the following by email on February 8, 2018:

“Before we agree to do more testing at our expense we need to get some hard numbers on cost of the clips. As an FYI, our current loop straps are molded in a 48 cavity hot runner mold in Asia. Needless to say these are very cost effective. Up to this point we have tested your product at no benefit to us and no cost to you and relayed the info. As you are aware testing is not quick and if you have to go to a certified lab, it is not cheap. As you mentioned in your email below, your original clip did result in facial contact of the guard to the chin which as you know is considered a failure. In speaking with an engineer


33 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

from another football helmet manufacturer he reported that they saw the same thing and this was with product that they had just recently bought off of your internet site. Currently your website states that the S.A.F.E. clip works with several of our models. Have you tested all these models to confirm that there is not an issue?” [Emphasis added.]

105. Based on Mayfield Athletics’ disclosure and online purchasing

documentation and history, there is no question that “the engineer from another

football helmet manufacturer” referenced in Mr. Long’s email was an engineer from

Xenith.

106. By discussing and disclosing its testing of the S.A.F.E.Clip with

another football helmet manufacturer, Mr. Long breached the nondisclosure

agreement between Mayfield Athletics and Schutt Sports.

107. As another example, in 2017 and 2018, Defendant Kyle Lamson sent

email correspondence to Mayfield Athletics that repeatedly questioned and

undermined the viability of the S.A.F.E.Clip and Mayfield Athletics’ testing of the

product in accordance with NOCSAE standards. Within this correspondence, Mr.

Lamson made several statements plainly intended to deter or prevent Mayfield

Athletics from selling and marketing the S.A.F.E.Clip, including the following

examples (among others):

a. “To be quite frank, I find it negligent that you would put a product on the market that modifies an existing safety product without understanding the base level testing or consequences of the product you are selling.” [Emphasis added.]

b. “Additionally, I am not focused on Xenith helmets. I am focused on


34 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

clips in the field, regardless of the helmet manufacturer. These clips should not be in use on the field until you have completed your due diligence and determined the proper path forward for NOCSAE certification. Mike Oliver of NOCSAE pointed out to you very clearly in his email that you need to consider the facial contact pass/fail criteria. Additionally we have provided you information that in all the cases we have tested, the facemask made contact with the face when tested in accordance with NOCSAE ND087. There is no reason to assume that other manufacturers facemasks would perform differently. We have pointed out to you multiple deviations it appears Dr. Zhang has taken from the NOCSAE standard in the testing she has conducted for you. You need to proceed with an action plan to remove the clips from use immediately. “The engineering reviews you mention below are very important. But these need to be completed, along with determining the proper path forward for NOCSAE certification, before these clips are in use. Not after.” [Emphasis added.]

108. As indicated, Mr. Lamson told Mayfield Athletics that Xenith’s testing

revealed that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip on their helmets violated NOCSAE standards.

Mayfield Athletics requested to review the results of the testing performed by

Xenith. Mr. Lamson refused to produce the results of the testing, claiming that the

results had not been preserved.

109. In sum, NOCSAE and the leading football helmet manufacturers have

made concerted and combined efforts to exclude aftermarket add-on products from

the national market for football safety equipment and accessories, thereby preserving

that market share for the helmet manufacturers themselves.

110. The leading helmet manufacturers have a strong motivation to conspire

or otherwise combine to boycott the S.A.F.E.Clip or exclude it from the market for


35 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

football safety equipment and accessories. If one manufacturer adopts the

S.A.F.E.Clip for use on some or all of its helmets, or otherwise offers it as an add-

on product with its helmets, non-adopting manufacturers could face product-liability

exposure for their failure to utilize or offer the S.A.F.E.Clip given its proven ability

to substantially reduce impact forces to the head each time a football player is hit.

Injury to Mayfield Athletics

111. Mayfield Athletics has attempted to enter the national market for

football safety equipment and accessories, specifically by producing and distributing

aftermarket products that have been shown to substantially improve the efficacy of

football helmets.

112. Mayfield Athletics’ target market for the sale of the S.A.F.E.Clip

includes over six million football participants (i.e., approximately 4,100,000

participants at the high school level, approximately 1,000,000 participants at the

junior level, approximately 81,000 participants at the college level, and

approximately 1,800 participants at the professional level), comprising a total

potential market of approximately $782,000,000 for football safety equipment and

accessories.

113. Defendants’ illegal, unlawful, and/or wrongful conduct has directly

inhibited and/or interfered with Mayfield Athletics’ ability to sell its products and

thereby compete in the national market for football safety equipment and


36 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

accessories. Most significantly, prospective purchasers of the S.A.F.E.Clip have

expressly declined to purchase the product based on an errant belief, propagated by

Defendants, that (1) use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will void a helmet manufacturer’s

certification that the helmet meets NOCSAE standards; (2) use of the S.A.F.E.Clip

will result in football players being barred from playing in most football leagues; (3)

use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will void a helmet’s warranty; (4) use of the S.A.F.E.Clip

will constitute an illegal act; (5) installation of the S.A.F.E.Clip will undermine the

integrity or efficacy of a helmet; and/or (6) use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will subject the

installer or user to personal liability.

Injury to Competition

114. The allegations set forth in this Complaint reflect the existence of

multiple contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies between the helmet

manufacturers and NOCSAE to maintain a monopoly on the market for football

safety equipment and accessories and thereby exclude Mayfield Athletics (and other

manufacturers of aftermarket or add-on helmet products) from the national market

for such products.

115. Defendants’ conduct has harmed, and continues to harm, Mayfield

Athletics; it has harmed, and continues to harm, football players as well as current

and potential consumers of football helmets and aftermarket products; and it has

harmed, and continues to harm, competition in the sale of aftermarket products for


37 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

use on football helmets.

116. Through formal and informal communications that installing

aftermarket or add-on products to football helmets would void the helmets’

warranties and the helmets’ certification to NOCSAE standards, or would otherwise

extinguish the helmet manufacturers’ potential liability in the case of injury,

Defendants have coerced consumers to purchase and use football helmets without

the benefit of aftermarket or add-on products (like the S.A.F.E.Clip), which have the

potential of substantially increasing the efficacy of helmets in preventing force to

the head and related injury.

117. Defendants have established and maintained monopoly power in the

national market for football safety equipment and accessories by rendering it largely

impossible for aftermarket or add-on product manufacturers to obtain certification

that their products meet NOCSAE standards. As a result, Defendants have made it

virtually impossible for aftermarket or add-on product manufacturers to produce

products that meet the mandatory rules for equipment that apply in the vast

majority—if not all—leagues of organized football in the United States, including at

the youth, college, and professional levels.

Defendants’ Refusal to Cease Their Unlawful Activities

118. On October 2, 2018, Mayfield Athletics sent, through its counsel,

written correspondence to Defendant Gregg Hartley of NOCSAE, explaining the


38 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

ways in which NOCSAE’s position regarding the use of aftermarket products on

football helmets is unsustainable and contrary to law (Exhibit H).

119. Mayfield Athletics received no response to the October 2, 2018

correspondence.

120. In November 2018, Mayfield Athletics sent, through its counsel,

written correspondence to Schutt Sports and Riddell requesting that the companies

(1) cease and desist all statements, representations, and publications indicating that

use of the S.A.F.E. Clip with their helmets would be illegal and/or would violate

their respective helmet warranties, and (2) cease and desist all indications that use

of the S.A.F.E.Clip would violate the applicable NOCSAE standards (Exhibit M).

121. Mayfield Athletics received no response from Schutt Sports to the

November 2018 correspondence.

122. Although Riddell has participated in discussions with Mayfield

Athletics since November 2018, it has never retracted, removed, or otherwise ceased

making representations to the general public and potential purchasers of the

Mayfield Athletics’ products that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip would be illegal, would

violate a helmet’s warranty, and/or would violate the applicable NOCSAE standards.

VI. CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I


39 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

Violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1) and Section 2 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (MCL 445.772)

(Contracts, Combinations, and/or Conspiracies Between NOCSAE and the Helmet Manufacturers)

123. Mayfield Athletics incorporates by reference all paragraphs set forth

above as though fully set forth herein.

124. NOCSAE has formed multiple contracts, combinations, and/or

conspiracies with Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith in violation of Section 1 of the

Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and Section 2 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act,

MCL 445.772.

125. The first category of contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies

giving rise to Mayfield Athletics’ antitrust claim consists of NOCSAE’s licensing

agreements with Riddell, Schutt, and Xenith.

126. Upon information and belief, each licensing agreement establishes a

contractual arrangement under which the helmet manufacturers may use the names,

trademarks, and phrases owned by NOCSAE in conjunction with the helmet

companies’ manufacture, sale, and/or marketing of products that satisfy the

applicable NOCSAE standards, as long as the helmet manufacturers pay a fee to

NOCSAE “for each unit of product sold, less returns, during the previous calendar

quarter which bears or includes a Licensed Property on the product itself, on its

packaging, or in its instructions, product documentation, or marketing materials

(whether in hardcopy or electronic media).”


40 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

127. Upon information and belief, NOCSAE’s licensing agreements with

Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith each provide that “[a]ny and all benefits arising

from [the manufacturers’] use of the Licensed Property or any other intellectual

property of NOCSAE shall inure directly and exclusively to the benefit of

NOCSAE.” (Emphasis added.)

128. Accordingly, under the licensing agreements, NOCSAE and Riddell,

Schutt Sports, and Xenith mutually benefit from (1) the sale of products licensed

under the NOCSAE agreements and (2) the exclusion from the market of products

that fail to meet, or are unable to meet, NOCSAE standards.

129. The licensing agreements involve activities having a substantial effect

on interstate commerce, in that the agreements govern the use of NOCSAE Licensed

Property on the helmet manufactures’ products and directly affect the sale,

reconditioning, and use of the helmet manufacturers’ products throughout the United

States.

130. Specifically, the licensing agreements provide a means by which

NOCSAE and the leading helmet manufacturers, including Riddell, Schutt Sports,

and Xenith, can achieve mutual financial benefit by promoting the sale of products

manufactured by those companies and deterring the sale of products manufactured

by entities that do not have, or are ineligible for, a licensing agreement with

NOCSAE.


41 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

131. NOCSAE’s licensing agreements with Schutt Sports, Riddell, and

Xenith unreasonably restrain trade by (1) diminishing consumer choice, (2)

enhancing the market power of Schutt Sports, Riddell, and Xenith over the

manufacturers of aftermarket or add-on products, and (3) collectively boycotting

and/or excluding aftermarket or add-on products from the national market for

football safety equipment and accessories. The anticompetitive effect of these

agreements is significantly heightened by NOCSAE’s unmatched influence and

power over the national football helmet industry, as set forth under Paragraphs 39-

81, supra.

132. The second category of contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies

giving rise to Mayfield Athletics antitrust claim originates from Riddell’s, Schutt

Sports’, and Xenith’s involvement in, and influence over, NOCSAE’s leadership and

operation. Upon information and belief, employees, agents, and/or representatives

of the nation’s leading helmet manufacturers (including Riddell, Schutt, and/or


members of the NOCSAE Standards Committee and/or the NOCSAE board of

directors, or they otherwise exhibit significant influence over the NOCSAE

Standards Committee and the NOCSAE board of directors. Upon information and

belief, the contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies giving rise to the instant

cause of action under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and Section 2 of


42 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.772, were established

during communications and/or meetings between the NOCSAE Standards

Committee, the NOCSAE board of directors, NOCSAE Executive Director/Legal

Counsel Mike Oliver, and/or employees, agents, and/or representatives of the

nation’s leading helmet manufacturers, including Riddell, Schutt, and/or Xenith.

133. Through contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies involving

NOCSAE and Riddell, Schutt, and/or Xenith, NOCSAE and the helmet

manufacturers have established a framework—augmented by public statements and

press releases—under which helmet manufacturers may arbitrarily and capriciously

decide, at their sole discretion, in the event that an aftermarket or add-on product is

installed on or used with one of their helmets, to (1) void the certification that the

helmet meets NOCSAE standards, (2) allow the certification to remain unaffected,

or (3) engage in additional certification testing.

134. As set forth under Paragraph 42, supra, the majority of football

regulatory bodies require players to use helmets that are certified as meeting

NOCSAE standards.

135. Based on the wrongful contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies

between NOCSAE, Riddell, Schutt, and/or Xenith—which have established and

resulted in the framework, representations, and practices described under Paragraphs

39-109 and 125-133—football teams, football players, and other consumers of


43 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

football helmet-related equipment commonly believe that the use of an aftermarket

add-on product—such as the S.A.F.E.Clip—will void a helmet’s certification to

NOCSAE standards, render the helmet ineligible for use in most forms or divisions

of organized football, undermine the integrity or efficacy of the helmet, and/or

subject the installer or user to personal liability. The erroneous beliefs resulting from

the wrongful contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies between NOCSAE and

Riddell, Schutt Sports, and/or Xenith have resulted in restraint of trade and

competition by largely excluding aftermarket add-on products (including the

S.A.F.E.Clip) from the national market for football safety equipment and

accessories.

136. The contracts, combinations, or conspiracies between NOCSAE and

Riddell, Schutt Sports, and/or Xenith constitute per se violations of state and federal

antitrust law, or violations of state and federal antitrust law under the rule of reason,

as they involve a group boycott of aftermarket add-on products for football

helmets—including the S.A.F.E.Clip—and a collective effort to exclude those

products from the national market for football safety equipment and accessories.

137. The contracts, combinations or conspiracies between NOCSAE,

Riddell, Schutt, and/or Xenith have unreasonably restrained trade and suppressed

competition in the national market for football safety equipment and accessories by

deterring and/or precluding the sale and distribution of aftermarket add-on products


44 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

for football helmets.

138. In addition to other relief, Mayfield Athletics is entitled to treble

damages under Section 4 of the Clayton Act because Defendants’ conduct has

materially and substantially caused direct antitrust injuries to Mayfield Athletics.

Among other things, Defendants’ conduct has precluded Mayfield Athletics from

fairly competing in the national market for football safety equipment and accessories

and has caused Mayfield Athletics to lose sales, as demonstrated by the fact that

prospective purchasers of the S.A.F.E.Clip have expressly declined to purchase the

product based on the errant belief, propagated by Defendants, (1) that use of the

S.A.F.E.Clip will void a helmet manufacturer’s certification that a helmet meets

NOCSAE standards and, accordingly, cause the helmet to be prohibited for use in

most football leagues; (2) that installation of the S.A.F.E.Clip will undermine the

integrity or efficacy of the helmet; and/or (3) that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will subject

the installer or user to personal liability.

139. In addition to directly injuring Mayfield Athletics, Defendants’ conduct

has had an adverse effect on competition as a whole by largely excluding from the

national market for football safety equipment and accessories aftermarket add-on

products made by manufacturers other than Riddell, Schutt, or Xenith.

COUNT II


45 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

Private Standard Setting in Violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1) and Section 2 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act

(Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.772) 140. Mayfield Athletics incorporates by reference all paragraphs set forth


141. NOCSAE holds itself out as an independent entity that promulgates

independent performance and testing standards for athletic equipment.

142. NOCSAE publishes advisory standards which are created, revised, and

approved by the NOCSAE Standards Committee.

143. Under NOCSAE licensing agreements, the NOCSAE logo can be used

on helmets that have been certified as complying with NOCSAE standards by SEI.

144. The NOCSAE Standards Committee purports to comply with the due

process requirements promulgated by the American National Standards Institute

(“ANSI”) for standards development bodies.

145. According to NOCSAE, its “voluntary performance and test standards

for athletic equipment . . . are available for adoption by any athletic regulatory body.”

(Exhibit A.)

146. The criteria established by NOCSAE and the certification process

required by NOCSAE have become the most influential standards in the football

helmet industry.

147. Because most organized football leagues require the use of helmets that


46 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

meet NOCSAE standards, consumers routinely decline to purchase football helmets

or football helmet add-on products that have not been certified as meeting NOCSAE

standards.

148. As such, if a manufacturer cannot demonstrate that its product satisfies

NOCSAE standards, it is at a significant disadvantage in the marketplace.


of the nation’s leading helmet manufacturers (including Riddell, Schutt, and/or


members of the NOCSAE Standards Committee and/or the NOCSAE board of

directors, or they otherwise exhibit significant influence over the NOCSAE

Standards Committee and/or the NOCSAE board of directors.

150. As explained supra in Paragraphs 47-49, NOCSAE’s financial viability

is directly dependent on funds received from the nation’s leading helmet

manufacturers, including Riddell, Schutt, and Xenith.

151. Correspondingly, NOCSAE has a financial interest in ensuring that its

standards influence consumers’ purchasing decisions, as it is primarily funded

through the per-unit fees that it charges to equipment manufacturers for use of the

trademarked NOCSAE logo(s) or phrase(s) on the products themselves, as well as

product packaging, instructions, documentation, or marketing materials.

152. As explained in Paragraphs 52-57, NOCSAE claims to have established


47 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

a “Severity Index” against which football helmets can be measured, but NOCSAE’s

own publications reveal that the Severity Index is illusory and, in fact, has very little

meaning in determining or expressing the safety or efficacy of a particular football

helmet.

153. Accordingly, NOCSAE has created a standard that large-scale helmet

manufacturers can manipulate and use to their advantage, especially considering that

standard has no practical value or application.

154. NOCSAE has arbitrarily decided that the component parts of a helmet

facemask, including facemask attachment hardware like the S.A.F.E.Clip, constitute

the “facemask system.”

155. NOSCAE has not developed a standard for mounting hardware,

including facemask attachment hardware such as the S.A.F.E.Clip, on a football

helmet.

156. Even though NOCSAE has no standard for assessing or certifying

facemask attachment hardware, NOCSAE has taken the position that facemask

attachment hardware is necessarily not certified.

157. Through its standard-setting procedures and public statements

regarding the use of aftermarket or add-on products, described supra under

Paragraphs 52-81 and 141-156, NOCSAE has made it impossible for the

S.A.F.E.Clip to receive formal certification that it satisfies NOCSAE standards.


48 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

158. NOCSAE has made public statements expressly and implicitly

disapproving and discouraging the purchase and use of aftermarket or add-on

products for sports helmets.

159. NOCSAE has publicly stated in multiple written statements that a

helmet manufacturer is authorized, at its sole discretion, to do any of the following

when an aftermarket or add-on product is used with one of its helmets: (1) void the

certification that the helmet meets NOCSAE standards; (2) allow the certification to

remain unaffected; or (3) engage in additional certification testing.

160. In giving helmet manufacturers this choice, NOCSAE has rendered its

performance and testing standards wholly meaningless, as helmet companies are

essentially free to determine the circumstances under which their products will meet

or be certified to NOCSAE standards. As such, helmet manufacturers have the

authority to arbitrarily and capriciously decide when the NOCSAE logo should be

used on its products and when the certification to NOCSAE standards is rendered

void.

161. NOCSAE has allowed the football helmet manufacturers—from which

NOCSAE receives the majority of its funding—to effectively control each step of

the NOCSAE standards-creating and certification processes and thereby exclude

aftermarket add-on products from the national market for football safety equipment

and accessories.


49 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

162. This abdication of NOCSAE authority places, in effect, all certifying

power in the hands of the helmet manufacturers and provides an “authorized” means

by which manufacturers can exclude aftermarket add-on products from the national

market for football safety equipment and accessories, given that the majority of

football regulatory bodies require players to wear football helmets that have been

certified as meeting NOCSAE standards.

163. The standards-setting and certification framework maintained by

NOCSAE is arbitrary and expressly permits helmet manufacturers to manipulate

NOCSAE standards, and certification to NOCSAE standards, in a discriminatory

manner.

164. On its website, NOCSAE represents that it is open to and encourages

the submission of suggestions, objections, or other responses to its standards by any

interested party.

165. NOCSAE has ignored and refused to consider or respond to Mayfield

Athletics’ communications expressing concerns in relation to the standards-setting

process maintained by NOCSAE.

166. This system created and maintained by NOCSAE creates a closed

group of football helmets manufacturers who may utilize illusory NOCSAE

“certification” to enjoy a monopoly on the national market for football safety

equipment and accessories.


50 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

167. Through this manipulation of private standards-setting power,

NOCSAE and the helmet manufacturers have largely excluded Mayfield Athletics’

S.A.F.E.Clip from the national market for football safety equipment and accessories.

168. In order to comply with antitrust law, private standard-setting by

associations must be conducted in a nonpartisan manner offering procompetitive

benefits.

169. To be valid under antitrust law, the private-standard setting process

must include safeguards that are sufficient to prevent the standard-setting process

from being biased by members with economic interests in restraining competition.

170. NOCSAE is subject to antitrust liability for direct injuries where the

private standard-setting process is biased as a result of the standard-setting body

being comprised of decisionmakers that share an economic interest in restraining

competition, or where the process is otherwise influenced by persons or entities that

share an economic interest in restraining competition.

171. NOCSAE’s standards-setting process does not include sufficient due

process protections to prevent the process from being biased by members with

economic interests in stifling product competition, or from otherwise being

influenced by persons or entities that share an economic interest in restraining

competition.

172. The foregoing allegations demonstrate that the helmet manufacturers


51 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

and NOCSAE (through its role as a private, self-appointed standard-setting body)

have unreasonably restrained trade in the national market for football safety

equipment and accessories in violation of state and federal antitrust law under both

a per se and rule-of-reason analysis.




Among other things, NOCSAE’s conduct has precluded Mayfield Athletics from

competing in the national market for football safety equipment and accessories and

has caused Mayfield Athletics to lose potential sales.

174. While directly injuring Mayfield Athletics, NOCSAE’s conduct has

also had an adverse effect on competition as a whole by expressly deterring the use

of—and largely excluding from the national market for football safety equipment

and accessories—aftermarket or add-on products.

COUNT III Violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1) and

Section 2 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (MCL 445.772) (Contracts, Combinations, and/or Conspiracies Between the Helmet

Manufacturers)



176. The conduct, statements, and representations made by Riddell, Schutt


52 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

Sports, and Xenith through their agents, employees, and/or representatives, as set

forth under Paragraphs 83-110 of this Complaint, reveal the existence of contracts,

combinations, and/or conspiracies to boycott and deter the sale and use of

aftermarket add-on products—most notably, the S.A.F.E.Clip—in violation of

Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and Section 2 of the Michigan Antitrust

Reform Act, MCL 445.772.

177. By way of example, Vincent Long’s email correspondence with an

agent, employee, and/or representative of Xenith, described in Paragraphs 104-106,

and Defendant Lamson’s email correspondence, described in Paragraphs 107-108,

reveal that Schutt Sports and Xenith combined and/or conspired to oppose the use,

sale, and distribution of the S.A.F.E.Clip.

178. Through the conduct, statements, and representations made by the

agents, employees, and/or representatives of Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith,

football teams, football players, and other consumers have been led to believe that

use of the S.A.F.E.Clip with their helmets would be “illegal” and/or would subject

the installer or user to personal liability.

179. The conduct, statements, and representations made by the agents,

employees, and/or representatives of Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith have

repeatedly deterred football teams, football players, and other consumers from

purchasing the S.A.F.E.Clip for fear that installing the clip on a helmet would violate


53 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

the applicable helmet warranty.

180. Through the conduct, statements, and representations made by the

agents, employees, and/or representatives of Riddell, Schutt Sports, and Xenith,

football teams, football players, and other consumers have been repeatedly led to

believe that players will be barred from participating in the sport under the rules

promulgated and/or utilized by the majority of football regulatory bodies if they

install the S.A.F.E.Clip on the companies’ helmets.

181. The contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies between Riddell,

Schutt Sports, and/or Xenith are manifestly anticompetitive and unreasonable,

imposing an unreasonable restrain on trade.

182. Contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies between Riddell, Schutt

Sports, and/or Xenith constitute per se violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act,

as they comprise a collective group boycott of aftermarket add-on products for

football helmets—including the S.A.F.E.Clip—and have largely excluded

aftermarket add-on product manufacturers, including Mayfield Athletics, from the

national market for football safety equipment and accessories.

183. Alternatively, the contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies between

Riddell, Schutt, and/or Xenith constitute violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act

under the rule of reason, as they have resulted in an unreasonable restraint of trade

and suppressed competition.


54 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

184. The contracts, combinations, and/or conspiracies between Riddell,

Schutt, and/or Xenith—as reflected by the conduct, statements, and representations

made by the agents, employees, and/or representatives of those entities—have

harmed competition in the national market for football safety equipment and

accessories by largely precluding the sale and distribution of aftermarket add-on

products for football helmets.






and has caused Mayfield Athletics to lose potential sales, as demonstrated by the

fact that prospective purchasers of the S.A.F.E.Clip have expressly declined to

purchase the products based on an errant belief, propagated by Defendants, that

using aftermarket products will (1) void a helmet’s warranty, (2) constitute an illegal

act, (3) result in football players being barred from playing in most football leagues,

(4) undermine the integrity or efficacy of a helmet; and/or (5) subject the installer or

user to personal liability.

186. While directly injuring Mayfield Athletics, Defendants’ conduct has

also had an adverse effect on competition as a whole by expressly deterring the use


55 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

of—and largely excluding from the national market for football safety equipment

and accessories—aftermarket or add-on products.

COUNT IV Violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 2) and

Section 2 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (MCL 445.772) (Conspiracy to Monopolize)



188. The facts set forth under Paragraphs 82-110 of this Complaint reveal

the existence of a combination or conspiracy between Defendants Riddell, Schutt

Sports, and/or Xenith to monopolize.

189. The facts set forth under Paragraphs 82-110 of this Complaint also

reveal overt, concerted acts performed in furtherance of the combination or

conspiracy.

190. Especially in light of the existence, function, and power of NOCSAE,

Riddell, Schutt Sports, and/or Xenith possess sufficient market power to exclude

competition from the national market for football safety equipment and accessories.

191. Riddell, Schutt Sports, and/or Xenith acquired monopoly power within

the national market for football safety equipment and accessories as a result, in part,

of their involvement in NOCSAE’s improper and unlawful standard-setting

processes and framework.

192. Mayfield Athletics and other aftermarket or add-on product


56 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

manufacturers have been largely excluded from the national market for football

safety equipment and accessories as a result of Defendants’ concerted,

anticompetitive conduct.

193. Riddell’s, Schutt Sports’, and Xenith’s public representations and

private representations concerning the use of aftermarket or add-on products have a

significant potential of forcing aftermarket or add-on product manufacturers to lose

significant sales and possibly go out of business in light of the helmet manufacturers’

combined monopoly power.

194. The combination or conspiracy to monopolize—as reflected by the

conduct, statements, and representations made by the agents, employees, and/or

representatives of Riddell, Schutt, and/or Xenith—has harmed competition in the

national market for football safety equipment and accessories by stifling the sale and

distribution of aftermarket add-on products for football helmets.






and has caused Mayfield Athletics to lose potential sales.

196. While directly injuring Mayfield Athletics, Defendants’ conduct has


57 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

also had an adverse effect on competition as a whole by largely excluding from the

market helmet add-on products made by manufacturers other than Riddell, Schutt,

or Xenith.

COUNT V Attempted Monopolization in Violation of

Section 2 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 2) and Section 3 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (MCL 445.773)

(Schutt Sports)



198. As illustrated by examples set forth supra under Paragraphs 82-84, 88-

97, and 100-106, Schutt Sports has made numerous public and private efforts to deter

or otherwise discourage consumers from purchasing the S.A.F.E.Clip.

199. Upon information and belief, Schutt Sports has attempted to

manufacture and patent a product that is functionally identical to the S.A.F.E.Clip.

200. Upon information and belief, Schutt Sports’ patent application was

denied because Mayfield Athletics’ S.A.F.E.Clip is already patented.

201. Upon information and belief, while attempting to develop and patent a

facemask attachment device that is functionally identical to the S.A.F.E.Clip, Schutt

Sports concurrently made public and private statements, through its agents,

employees, and/or representatives, that using the S.A.F.E.Clip on a Schutt Sports

helmet will void the helmet’s warranty, will void any certification that the helmet


58 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

meets NOCSAE standards, and will “make the helmet or face mask illegal to use in

most organized football leagues, games or other activities.” (Emphasis added.)

202. In simultaneously attempting to produce a product that is functionally

identical to the S.A.F.E.Clip while making false or deceitful statements and

representations to the public and individual consumers, Schutt revealed its intent to

monopolize the national market for facemask attachment devices that reduce g-force

impact when a helmet is hit.

203. Based on its share of the related national market for football helmets,

as well as other indicators, there is a dangerous probability that Schutt will be

successful in monopolizing the market for facemask attachment devices that reduce

g-force impact when a helmet is hit.


damages under Section 4 of the Clayton Act because Schutt Sports’ conduct has


205. While directly injuring Mayfield Athletics, Schutt Sports’ conduct has

also had an adverse effect on competition as a whole.

COUNT VI TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE

WITH A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP OR EXPECTANCY (SCHUTT SPORTS)




59 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

207. Mayfield Athletics has valid business relationships and business

expectancies with football teams, football players, football equipment distributors,

and other purchasers of football equipment throughout the United States.

208. Schutt Sports is aware of Mayfield Athletics’ business relationships and

expectancies through a variety of avenues. Among other things, consumers

interested in purchasing Mayfield Athletics’ products have expressly asked Schutt

Sports about the consequences of using aftermarket or add-on products on Schutt

football helmets.

209. Schutt Sports, through its employees, agents, and/or representatives,

has informed Mayfield Athletics’ current and potential clients and purchasers,

through online publications and direct contact, that replacing the facemask clips on

a Schutt Sports helmet with S.A.F.E.Clips will void the Schutt Sports warranty

and/or void the certification that the helmet meets NOCSAE standards.

210. In making these statements through its employees, agents, and/or

representatives, or otherwise providing information or instructions that prompted its

employees, agents, and/or representatives to make these statements, Schutt intended

to interfere with Mayfield Athletics’ current and future business relationships with

football teams, football players, football equipment distributors, and other

purchasers of football equipment, and/or deter those individuals and organizations

form purchasing the S.A.F.E.Clip.


60 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

211. Schutt Sports’ representations that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will void the

Schutt Sports warranty and void the certification that the helmet meets NOCSAE

standards have interfered with Mayfield Athletics’ business relationships and


and other purchasers of football equipment by deterring them from buying the

S.A.F.E.Clip.

212. Schutt Sports’ interference with Mayfield Athletics’ current and

potential business relationships and expectancies has caused Mayfield Athletics

substantial damages, consisting of lost sales and profits.

COUNT VII TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE

WITH A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP OR EXPECTANCY (RIDDELL)





and other purchasers of football equipment throughout the United States

215. Riddell is aware of Mayfield Athletics’ business relationships and

expectancies through a variety of avenues. Among other things, consumers

interested in purchasing Mayfield Athletics’ products have expressly asked Riddell

about the consequences of using aftermarket or add-on products on Riddell helmets.


61 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

216. Riddell, through its employees, agents, and/or representatives, has

informed Mayfield Athletics’ current and potential clients and purchasers, through

online publications and direct contact, that replacing the facemask clips on a Riddell

helmet with S.A.F.E.Clips will void the Riddell warranty and void the certification

that the helmet meets NOCSAE standards, and that Riddell would no longer “cover

the insurance” in the event of an injury.



employees, agents, and/or representatives to make these statements, Riddell intended



purchasers of football equipment, and/or deter those individuals and organizations


218. Riddell’s representations that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will void a

football helmet’s warranty, void the certification that the helmet meets NOCSAE

standards, and/or cause Riddell to no longer cover the insurance in the event of an

injury have interfered with Mayfield Athletics’ business relationships and



S.A.F.E.Clip.


62 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

219. Riddell’s interference with Mayfield Athletics’ current and potential

business relationships and expectancies has caused Mayfield Athletics substantial

damages, consisting of lost sales and profits.

COUNT VIII TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE

WITH A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP OR EXPECTANCY (XENITH)






222. Xenith, through its employees, agents, and/or representatives, has

informed Mayfield Athletics’ current and potential clients and purchasers, through

online publications and direct contact, that replacing the facemask clips on a Xenith

helmet with S.A.F.E.Clips will void the Xenith warranty and/or void the certification

that the helmet meets NOCSAE standards.



employees, agents, and/or representatives to make these statements, Xenith intended




63 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

purchasers of football equipment and/or deter these individuals and organizations


224. Xenith’s representations that use of the S.A.F.E.Clip will void the

Xenith warranty and/or void the certification that the helmet meets NOCSAE

standards have interfered with Mayfield Athletics’ business relationships and



S.A.F.E.Clip.

225. Xenith’s interference with Mayfield Athletics’ current and potential

business relationships and expectancies has caused Mayfield Athletics substantial

damages, consisting of lost sales and profits.

226. The statements and misrepresentations made by Defendant Lamson,

described supra in Paragraphs 107, also reflect an intent to preclude the sale and

marketing of the S.A.F.E.Clip and otherwise interfere with Mayfield Athletics’

business relationships and expectancies through the removal of the S.A.F.E.Clip

from the market for football safety equipment and accessories and from the playing

field.

COUNT IX TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE

WITH A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP OR EXPECTANCY (NOCSAE)



64 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }





229. Individuals and organizations have expressed an interest in purchasing,

or an intent to purchase, the S.A.F.E.Clip for individual or team use, but ultimately

declined to purchase the product based on the belief, supported by NOCSAE

publications and communications, that the use of an aftermarket or add-on product

may void a helmet’s certification to NOCSAE standards.

230. NOCSAE was aware, through Mayfield Athletics’ discussions and

correspondence with Defendant Mike Oliver, Defendant Gregg Hartley, and others,

that Mayfield Athletics had existing and potential contracts and business deals with


purchasers of football equipment for purchase of the S.A.F.E.Clip.

231. After Mayfield Athletics began marketing its products, NOCSAE

issued several press releases and publications stating that, when an add-on item is

added to a helmet, the manufacturer of the helmet retains the discretion to declare

its NOCSAE certification void, allow its NOCSAE certification to remain

unaffected, or engage in additional testing of the new model with the add-on product.

232. Specifically, NOCSAE has taken the position that (1) facemask


65 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

attachment hardware is necessarily not certified, even though NOCSAE has no

standard for assessing or certifying facemask attachment hardware, and (2) the

maker of a facemask or helmet retains the option of voiding its NOCSAE

certification in the event that after-market hardware (such as the S.A.F.E.Clip) is

used with the helmet or facemask.

233. NOCSAE has repeatedly made public statements expressly

discouraging the use of aftermarket or add-on products for football helmets.

234. Through all of these statements and actions, NOCSAE intentionally

interfered with Mayfield Athletics’ business relationships and expectancies.

235. NOCSAE’s conduct has permitted and given credence to Riddell’s,

Schutt Sports’, and Xenith’s representations of authority to declare their NOCSAE

certifications void and claim warranty violations based on the installation or use of

aftermarket products, when, in fact, federal law prevents a manufacturer from

disclaiming or voiding a warranty for the installation of an aftermarket product. See

15 U.S.C. 2302(c); 15 U.S.C. 2310; 16 C.FR. 700.10.

236. As a result of NOCSAE’s significant influence and control over the

products that are permitted for use in the majority of organized football leagues and

programs in the United States, NOCSAE’s representations and actions have caused

Mayfield Athletics to incur damages consisting of lost contracts and profits based

on potential customers’ beliefs, from NOCSAE communications and publications,


66 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

that (1) helmet add-on products should not be used; (2) the S.A.F.E.Clip does not

meet NOCSAE standards, and (3) the S.A.F.E.Clip is unable to be certified as

meeting NOCSAE standards.

VII. RELIEF REQUESTED

WHEREFORE, Mayfield Athletics respectfully requests that this Honorable

Court order the following relief:

A. The entry of a declaratory judgment under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202 declaring that Defendants NOCSAE, Schutt Sports, Xenith, and Riddell have violated Michigan and federal antitrust law;

B. Enter a permanent injunction requiring Defendants to terminate, remove, or otherwise eradicate all public and private statements and representations that the installation or use of an add-on or aftermarket product with a football helmet may (1) void the helmet’s warranty, (2) render its certification to NOCSAE standards void, (3) constitute illegal activity, or (4) affect the insurance- or liability-related responsibilities of a helmet manufacturer;

C. Enter a permanent injunction requiring Defendants to terminate, remove, or otherwise eradicate all public and private representations that Mayfield Athletics’ products are unable to meet or otherwise comply with NOCSAE standards;

D. Enter a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants from performing any other acts in violation of the state and federal antitrust law and Michigan tort law;

E. Enter a money judgment awarding Mayfield Athletics treble damages under Section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. § 15(a)), incorporating actual damages under Section 8 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.778), as compensation for the antitrust injury directly sustained by Mayfield Athletics;


67 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

F. Enter a money judgment awarding Mayfield Athletics damages for all of the losses that it has incurred based on Defendants’ tortious interference with Mayfield Athletics’ valid business relationships and expectancies; and

G. Enter a judgment awarding Mayfield Athletics all other relief to which this Court finds that it is entitled, plus all interest, costs, and attorney fees recoverable under the law (including 15 U.S.C. § 15(a) and/or any other provision of law), and/or through equitable relief.

Respectfully submitted,

HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT P.C. Dated: September 16, 2019 /s/ James F. Hewson

JAMES F. HEWSON (P27127) DIANE L. HEWSON (P44628) LYNN B. SHOLANDER (P78839) Hewson & Van Hellemont, P.C. Attorneys for Mayfield Athletics 25900 Greenfield Road Suite 650 Oak Park, MI 48237 (248) 968-5200/(248) 968-5270 fax


68 {Doc No. 00955667}

{DocNo. 02547124 }

JURY DEMAND

Mayfield Athletics, through its attorneys, Hewson and Van Hellemont P.C.,

hereby demands a trial by jury in the above-captioned matter.

Respectfully submitted,

HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT P.C. Dated: September 16, 2019 /s/ James F. Hewson

JAMES F. HEWSON (P27127) DIANE L. HEWSON (P44628) LYNN B. SHOLANDER (P78839) Hewson & Van Hellemont, P.C. Attorneys for Mayfield Athletics 25900 Greenfield Road Suite 650 Oak Park, MI 48237 (248) 968-5200/(248) 968-5270 fax

PROOF OF SERVICE

I declare under penalty of perjury that on September 16, 2019, I served a copy of the foregoing document upon counsel of record via electronic filing. The above

statement is true to the best of my knowledge and information.

_/s/ Michelle L. Alexander___ Michelle L. Alexander


EXHIBIT A

Case 2:19-cv-12712-GAD-EAS ECF No. 1-1 filed 09/16/19 PageID.69 Page 1 of 88

7/23/2019 FAQs – NOCSAE

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/faqs/ 1/30

FAQsFollowing are frequently asked questions and answers

concerning NOCSAE policies and procedures, adoption and

enforcement of the standards, and issues related to safety

and speci�c sports athletic equipment.

NOCSAE welcomes questions and encourages you to reach

out to us directly for additional information. Please email

NOCSAE Executive Director, Mike Oliver.

NOCSAE General

What is NOCSAE?

National Operating Commi�ee onStandards for Athletic Equipment

Previous subscribers need to re-register.

Contact Us

Search NOCSAE

Home

Players, Parents & Coaches

Standards

Certi�cation

Research Grant Program

News and Media

About NOCSAE

Meetings


http://[email protected]/

https://nocsae.org/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/contact-nocsae/

https://nocsae.org/

https://nocsae.org/players-parents-coaches/

https://nocsae.org/standards/

https://nocsae.org/certification/

https://nocsae.org/research-grant-program/

https://nocsae.org/news-and-media/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/

https://nocsae.org/meetings/



What is NOCSAE’s role?

Who is NOCSAE?

How is NOCSAE funded?

How does NOCSAE create and set standards?

How can I get a copy of a NOCSAE standard?

How are products certi�ed to NOCSAE standards?

How are NOCSAE standards enforced?

How can I determine if a product meets the

NOCSAE standard?

Does the NOCSAE logo have to be embossed on

equipment such as helmets and face guards?

What penalty will be imposed if an athlete is not

wearing certi�ed protective equipment mandated

by the rules?

How do add-on products impact helmets certi�ed

to the NOCSAE standard?

Can a helmet which bears the NOCSAE seal be

altered or repaired without legal rami�cations?

What is NOCSAE’s Severity Index (SI)?

Why is the Severity Index (SI) threshold 1200?

Would a lower SI threshold provide more

protection?

What risks do athletes and parents need to

understand when it comes to participation in

sports, even when using athletic equipment that

meets the NOCSAE standard?

Why do helmets certi�ed to the NOCSAE standard

include a warning label?

Recerti�cation

How does the NOCSAE recerti�cation process

work?

How often does NOCSAE require that a football

helmet be recerti�ed?




How long will helmets stay in certi�ed condition?

What happens when a helmet no longer meets the

standard?

Which reconditioners can recertify previously

certi�ed football helmets?

Does the NOCSAE standard require the use of

speci�c brand name replacement parts when

helmets are reconditioned?

Concussion Information

What is the helmet’s role in protecting against

concussions?

Does certi�cation to the NOCSAE standard mean

that a helmet prevents concussions?

Can the NOCSAE helmet test results be used to

determine which helmet is the best helmet for

protecting against concussions?

How is NOCSAE advancing concussion research?

Commotio Cordis/Chest ProtectorPerformance Standard for CommotioCordis

What is commotio cordis and how does NOCSAE’s

chest protector performance standard protect

against it?

Are products currently available that meet the

NOCSAE chest protector performance standard

for commotio cordis? Is the standard required by

sports governing bodies?

Football

(For questions about concussion risks and protection, see

previous section.)




How can I determine if a helmet meets the

NOCSAE helmet test standard?

How does NOCSAE’s football helmet standard

address youth and adult players?

What are the most important factors when

selecting a football helmet?

How are football helmets tested?

Are all football helmet sizes tested?

Lacrosse

How are lacrosse helmets and face masks tested?

What steps can consumers take to ensure lacrosse

balls meet NOCSAE standards?

Baseball/So�ball

Does NOCSAE have a standard for protective

headgear for fast pitch softball pitchers?

Do cheek �ap products meet the NOCSAE

standard for face protection?

Do new helmet models that include a built-in

cheek �ap meet the NOCSAE standard for face

protection?

Are products available that meet the NOCSAE

standard for face protection?

Why do some youth leagues not allow cheek �aps?

Other Sports

Does NOCSAE have a hockey helmet standard?

NOCSAE General

What is NOCSAE?

The National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic

Equipment or NOCSAE (pronounced “noxey”) is an




independent and nonpro�t standards development body

with the sole mission to enhance athletic safety through

scienti�c research and the creation of performance

standards for athletic equipment. Since its inception in 1969,

NOCSAE has been a leading force in the e�ort to improve

athletic equipment, and to reduce injuries through robust

standards for athletic equipment.

NOCSAE was originally formed in response to a need for a

performance test standard for football helmets. In 1973, the

NOCSAE Football Helmet Standard was developed and new

helmet models were �rst tested to this standard in 1974. The

�rst baseball batting helmet standard was published in 1981,

and helmet models were tested to this standard beginning in

1983. The baseball standard has since been designated as

the baseball/softball batting helmet standard. In 1986 a

performance test standard was published for lacrosse

helmets and face guards, and in 1987, a standard for football

face guards was released.

Today, NOCSAE has 49 performance and test standards for a

wide range of sports and continues to investigate other

athletic equipment to determine the feasibility or necessity

of establishing additional standards. NOCSAE standards are

constantly being updated to re�ect the latest science,

technology and medicine.

Return to top

What is NOCSAE’s role?

NOCSAE develops voluntary performance and test standards

for athletic equipment that are available for adoption by any

athletic regulatory body. Numerous national and

international regulatory bodies for sports require NOCSAE

standards, including the NFL, NCAA, National Federation of

State High School Associations (NFHS), International

Federation of American Football, USA Football, US Lacrosse

and the United States Department of Defense Education




Activity which oversees and regulates military base athletic

programs for the children of military families around the

world.

Return to top

Who is NOCSAE?

NOCSAE’s board of directors represent a diverse and

passionate group of sports and medical professionals that

have joined forces for the common goal of reducing sports-

related injuries. Serving without compensation, NOCSAE’s

board of directors is comprised of representatives from the

American College Health Association, American Orthopaedic

Society for Sports Medicine, American College of Sports

Medicine, American Medical Society for Sports Medicine,

American Academy of Pediatrics, Athletic Equipment

Managers Association, American Football Coaches

Association, National Athletic Equipment Reconditioners

Association, National Athletic Trainers Association, Sports &

Fitness Industry Association. Non-voting members of the

board include the National Collegiate Athletic Association

(NCAA) and the National Federation of State High School

Associations (NFHS).

Return to top

How is NOCSAE funded?

NOCSAE is an independent, nonpro�t 501(c)(3) organization

funded primarily through licensing fees it charges to

equipment manufacturers that want to have their

equipment certi�ed or recerti�ed to NOCSAE standards.

Approximately 75 to 80 percent of all revenue collected from

these license fees is reinvested into education and research

to advance the science and safety of athletes. Manufacturers

and reconditioners are obligated by contract license

agreement with NOCSAE to maintain detailed quality control




and quality assurance programs which include testing

randomly selected helmets during production to make sure

they meet the NOCSAE standards.

Return to top

How does NOCSAE create and set standards?

NOCSAE standards are created, revised and approved by the

NOCSAE Standards Committee, which serves as a consensus

body in accordance with the American National Standards

Institute (ANSI) due process requirements for standards

development bodies. The NOCSAE standard is an objective

pass/fail standard, not a comparative standard. NOCSAE

standards are constantly being updated to re�ect the latest

science, technology and medicine.

The makeup of the NOCSAE Standards Committee is

inclusive of all materially a�ected interests that may be

impacted by its standards. The requires that a balance of

interests always be maintained on the Standards Committee,

and these requirements prevent any single interest from

dominating the Standards Committee or the development,

promulgation, or revision of a standard.

NOCSAE invites anyone who may be impacted by a standard

to be involved in its development, including those who

represent the sports and medical communities,

manufacturers, parents and others. Interested parties are

encouraged to submit comments, suggestions, objections or

other responses to any standards under consideration or

existing standards. This openness and invitation to

participation in the standards development process

complies with ANSI due process guidelines.

Return to top

How can I get a copy of a standard?The current standards and any proposed revisions or




modi�cations are available in the NOCSAE Standards section

of our website.

Return to top

How are products certi�ed to the NOCSAE standards?

NOCSAE sets performance and test standards for athletic

equipment. NOCSAE does not certify or approve athleticequipment. Safety Equipment Institute (SEI) oversees the

certi�cation of athletic equipment to NOCSAE standards.

Since 2015, NOCSAE has required third-party certi�cation of

compliance with NOCSAE standards. Third-party certi�cation

enhances the integrity of all NOCSAE standards, giving

athletes con�dence that their athletic equipment has been

tested by a neutral, independent body to meet the highest

performance standards. This is the most stringent and

unbiased way to determine standards compliance, as the

third party cannot have any connection to manufacturers or

products they certify. NOCSAE is the only athletic equipment

standards development organization that mandates

independent third-party certi�cation of compliance, in

accordance with ANSI/ISO 17065 international guidelines.

Learn more in the Certi�cation section of our website or at

the SEI website: www.seinet.org

Both the manufacturer and SEI as the certifying body have

the right, under the NOCSAE standards, to declare a

certi�cation void if the certi�ed product is altered after

certi�cation and made available for sale. A model is certi�ed

in the condition and con�guration it is o�ered for sale to the

public. An alteration or addition to that con�guration after

sale may change the performance characteristics.

Manufacturers seeking to certify their products to NOCSAE

standards will need to submit necessary testing fees,

product testing samples, product labels, quality program

manuals and other required materials to SEI. Manufacturers


https://nocsae.org/standards/

http://nocsae.org/certification/

http://www.seinet.org/



also will participate in a quality audit and review protocols

for responding to customer complaints regarding product

performance.

Return to top

How are NOCSAE standards enforced?

NOCSAE does not possess a surveillance force to ensure

compliance with the standards. The standards are voluntary

and are available for adoption by any equipment

manufacturer, user group or athletic regulatory body.

However, if a �rm a�xes the NOCSAE seal to its helmets, it

accepts the responsibility that all of those helmets meet the

appropriate NOCSAE standards. Likewise, it is the

responsibility of a reconditioner to recertify that all helmets

to which the �rm a�xes its seal of recerti�cation meet the

NOCSAE standard applicable at the time the helmet was

originally manufactured. If a helmet with a NOCSAE seal

attached is found de�cient, notice should be given to the

NOCSAE board of directors or to the executive director.

Return to top

How can I determine if a product meets the NOCSAEstandard?

Look for the NOCSAE logo. The “Meets NOCSAE Standard”

logo con�rms that a sports equipment product meets the

latest science, technology and medicine criteria, providing

the best possible protection for that athlete. The logo

indicates that compliance with the NOCSAE standard has

been independently certi�ed by Safety Equipment Institute

(SEI). All athletic equipment products that meet the NOCSAE

standard are certi�ed by SEI and a complete list of certi�ed

products is available on their website at www.seinet.org.

Return to top





Does the NOCSAE logo have to be embossed onequipment such as helmets and face guards?

The NOCSAE standards require that the logos and warnings

be “permanent” as that word is de�ned in document ND001-

17m17b:

“Permanent (Label/Marking) – A label, or similar

marking, that cannot be readily (1), removed without

leaving a trace of its previous existence (2), erased or (3),

smudged to the point that it is illegible. If it requires

chemical or mechanical means such as the use of

solvents, abrasives, grinding, etc., to remove a label or

marking, then that label or marking is acceptable.”

Many helmets will have the logos embossed or stamped into

the shell, but others may use a permanent label or printing

to accomplish the same goal. As long as the label is

permanent as de�ned above, the equipment labeling

requirement is satis�ed.

Return to top

What penalty will be imposed if an athlete is not wearingcerti�ed protected equipment mandated by the rules?

For speci�c rules and requirements regarding athletic

equipment used in football, baseball/softball and lacrosse,

the respective rules-making groups of the sponsoring

organization would be contacted, i.e., the National Collegiate

Athletic Association (NCAA), the National Federation of State

High School Associations (NFHS), etc. There may be some

circumstances where the use of non-certi�ed equipment

constitutes the use of illegal equipment and could result in

player disquali�cation.

Return to top


https://nocsae.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/1514996961ND00117m17bDropTestMethod.pdf



How do add-on products impact helmets certi�ed to theNOCSAE standard?

Helmets should not be altered. Add-on accessories can

change a helmet and interfere with performance in ways

unintended by the manufacturer. The helmet’s original

padding, �t and components were tested for compliance

with the NOCSAE standards, and altering these components

may result in a helmet that does not perform as designed,

and could increase the risk of injury. A manufacturer can

declare a product’s certi�cation to the NOCSAE standard void

if its product is altered.

Return to top

Can a helmet which bears the NOCSAE seal be altered orrepaired without legal rami�cations?

A helmet should not be altered. Any change or modi�cation

in the con�guration of the shell or liner materials from

manufacturing speci�cations could substantially alter the

performance of the helmet as a unit, causing a change in

helmet performance, and possibly exposing the individual

responsible to liability. Individual helmet models are certi�ed

in the condition and con�guration in which they were

manufactured, and any alteration, modi�cation, or change

from the manufacturing speci�cations could a�ect the

model’s performance on the NOCSAE certi�cation test. By

following proper installation procedures and using

replacement parts which meet or exceed original

manufacturer speci�cations, skilled repair of a football

helmet should not a�ect the integrity of the energy

attenuation system. It is suggested that the manufacturer be

consulted before any materials are applied to the helmet

such as, but not limited to, paint, wax, thinners, solvents,

vinyl tape designs, cleaning agents, etc.

Return to top




What is NOCSAE’s Severity Index?

NOCSAE’s Severity Index (SI) is a weighted impulse threshold

criterion for a general category of signi�cant head injuries

based on scienti�c research and published data. SI is a

method for measuring a helmet’s ability to reduce linear

head accelerations caused by impact forces to the helmet. SI

measurements are obtained from a range of di�erent

impact velocities to multiple locations and at various angles

and temperatures, and from impacts with varying projectiles

and impact surfaces. Test head form size and mass vary with

di�erent size helmets to demonstrate performance across

all sizes o�ered in a given model.

The NOCSAE helmet standard uses a pass/fail threshold of

1200 SI to determine whether a helmet meets the standard

performance criteria. Each helmet must perform below 1200

SI on every impact location. Helmets that perform below

1200 SI have been shown to reduce skull fracture, TBI, and

other signi�cant head and brain injuries. Once the 1200 SIthreshold is met, there is no clinically measurabledi�erence in injury risk based on lower SI scores. For

example, a value of 450 SI isn’t more likely to reduce injury

than 800 SI.

It is impractical for every individual helmet to be tested, so

every certi�ed helmet must be part of a comprehensive

quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) certi�cation

program that applies a 3 standard deviation (SD), or a 0.65

acceptance quality level (AQL) requirement to randomly

selected samples that accurately and statistically represent

an entire batch or production run of the same model and

size. The NOCSAE mandated QA/QC program establishes to

a 95% con�dence level that 99+% of the untested helmets

would meet the standard if every helmet was tested. This

level of compliance is the toughest of all helmet QA/QC

programs, including military combat helmets and motorcycle

helmets tested to federal helmet standards.




There is no single SI number for any single helmet or model.

A helmet model in any given size alone may have over

10,000 di�erent SI scores from all samples tested, depending

on the number of helmets produced. NOCSAE does not

allow SI-related safety claims about one model or brand over

another because such claims would be scienti�cally

unfounded and misleading to consumers.

Return to top

Why is the Severity Index (SI) threshold 1200? Would alower SI threshold provide more protection?

Once the 1200 Severity Index (SI) threshold is met, thereis no measurable di�erence in injury risk based ondi�erences in SI scores. The SI value is a pass/fail threshold

which is based on a number of scienti�c studies, but the data

does not support using the SI numbers as a ‘sliding scale’,

such that lower numbers reduce or prevent more injuries

than higher numbers. For example, there is no way to

determine whether a reduction of 200 SI units would result

in measurable protective improvement in a helmet for all

types of potential injuries. For example, it is not accurate to

say that a helmet with an overall SI average of 600 is

measurably better than a helmet with an overall SI average

of 500. Most new and recently reconditioned helmets test far

below the threshold, generally averaging in the 600-800 SI

range. The ideal SI value for reducing the occurrence of one

type of injury at low level hits may not be the same value for

a higher impact force.

Return to top

What risks do athletes and parents need to understandwhen it comes to participation in sports, even whenusing athletic equipment that meets the NOCSAEstandard?




Participation in sports requires an acceptance of risk of

injury. Parents and players should understand that no

helmet can prevent all concussions, and no helmet can

protect you from serious brain and/or neck injuries including

paralysis or death.

Using properly certi�ed equipment is important in reducing

the risk of injury, but it is only one of several steps that

athletes and parents must take to reduce injury risk and

injury severity. Avoiding unnecessary head contact and

following the rules which prohibit dangerous play are all

necessary parts of injury prevention. And when an injury

does occur, it must be addressed immediately.

Players that experience concussion symptoms including loss

of consciousness or memory, dizziness, headache, nausea or

confusion, should immediately stop athletic activity and

report these symptoms to their coach, athletic trainer and

parents. Players should not return to a game or participation

in sports until all symptoms are gone and medical clearance

has been con�rmed. Ignoring this warning may lead to

another and more serious or fatal brain injury.

Return to top

Why do helmets certi�ed to the NOCSAE standardinclude a warning label?

The NOCSAE warning label requirement has long been a part

of each standard and is intended to warn participants of the

limitations of protection. The helmet is designed to provide

additional direct protection for the head, but neither

football, baseball/softball batting, baseball/softball catcher’s

or lacrosse helmets protect a player’s neck.

NOCSAE urges that the warning statement be shared with

members of the football, baseball, softball and lacrosse

teams and that all coaches alert participants to the potential

for injury. The wording of the warning label as set forth in




the NOCSAE standard speci�es the core information that

must be conveyed by the label, but permits a manufacturer

to add or supplement the content as it determines

necessary.

Return to top

Recerti�cation

How does the NOCSAE recerti�cation process work?

NOCSAE is the only standards organization that has a

provision for recerti�cation. You can be reassured three, �ve,

seven years down the road that it meets certi�cation

standards.

NOCSAE recerti�cation standards require that the testing

laboratory at each reconditioning facility must be in a

separate room apart from the general reconditioning work.

Compliance also requires the temperature be controlled at a

speci�c range, and a written quality control protocol that

includes issues such as sample selection protocol and

documentation of responses to any test failures. Helmets

selected for testing must be a statistically signi�cant sample

of the helmet models that will likely be reconditioned and

recerti�ed that year. The helmets selected for testing must

be tested prior to any reconditioning or repair work being

done. This means the helmets are tested in the condition

they were in as of the last play of the last game of the last

season. Once the helmet is selected, it is tagged, tested and

followed through the entire recerti�cation process, and

when the process is �nished that exact helmet is tested

again. No helmets in the batches represented by those

samples may be recerti�ed or returned to a school or club

until all the samples have passed the post-reconditioning

testing. Reconditioners use the same drop-testing

equipment for recerti�cation as is required for newly

manufactured helmets. The entire testing process and data

collection process is controlled by NOCSAE computer




software speci�cally developed to ensure that the

recerti�cation testing data is accurate, valid and reliable.

More information about the recerti�cation and

reconditioning process is available on the National Athletic

Equipment Reconditioners Association (NAERA) website at

http://naera.net/.

Return to top

How often does NOCSAE require that helmets berecerti�ed?

There is nothing in the NOCSAE standard that requires any

helmet to be recertifed on any regular basis. NOCSAE does

recommend that organizations adopt and follow a program

of helmet inspection and reconditioning that meets their

particular needs, based on age and size of players, severity

of helmet usage and ages of helmets, among other factors.

For example, some schools recondition and recertify their

football helmets every year, others every two years.

A manufacturer may premise warranty coverage upon

regular reconditioning and recerti�cation, but that

requirement is not mandated by NOCSAE standards. A

manufacturer is also free to limit the number of times its

helmet may be reconditioned, or it may establish a useful life

beyond which it will not allow reconditioning.

Return to top

How long will helmets stay in certi�ed condition? Whathappens when a helmet no longer meets the standard?

Factors such as the type of helmet and the amount and

intensity of usage will determine the condition of each

helmet over a period of time. It should be noted that the

NOCSAE helmet standard is not a warranty, but simply a

statement that a particular helmet model met the


http://naera.net/



requirements of performance tests when it was

manufactured or reconditioned. In recent years, the

proportion of helmets recerti�ed annually by NAERA

members has ranged between 84-96 percent. Tests in these

plants indicate that helmets which regularly undergo the

reconditioning and recerti�cation process can meet standard

performance requirements for many seasons, depending on

the model and usage. For football helmets, NOCSAE does

recommend that the consumer adhere to a program of

periodically having used helmets recerti�ed. Because of the

di�erence in the amount and intensity of usage on each

helmet, the consumer should use discretion regarding the

frequency with which certain helmets are to be recerti�ed.

Consumers should be aware that in the case of batter’s

helmets, some helmet models are permitted by the

manufacturer to be recerti�ed, others are not. If a

manufacturer does not permit a batter’s helmet to be

recerti�ed, that helmet must have a label that tells the

consumer when the certi�cation expires, or how long the

original new helmet certi�cation is valid. Once the helmet

reaches that period, the certi�cation of compliance with the

NOCSAE standard is no longer good. If the rules of play

require the use of a helmet certi�ed to the NOCSAE

standard, using a helmet with an expired certi�cation could

be considered the use of illegal equipment.

If a manufacturer does permit the recerti�cation of a batter’s

helmet, NOCSAE ND001 mandates that “Helmets intended to

be recerti�ed shall have a recerti�cation interval provided by

the manufacturer. Certi�cation life is limited to this time

period. Helmets not recerti�ed during the stated interval

shall no longer be certi�ed. Recerti�cation interval required

for warranty validation shall satisfy this requirement.”

Return to top

Which reconditioners can recertify previously certi�edfootball helmets?




Information about licensed reconditioners is available on the

National Athletic Equipment Reconditioners Association

(NAERA) website at http://naera.net/.

Return to top

Does the NOCSAE standard require the use of speci�cbrand name replacement parts when helmets arereconditioned?

No. The NOCSAE standard is not brand speci�c. Neither the

test nor the performance standard call for any speci�c

brands, materials or designs. The standard speaks only to

the performance of the helmet when new, or after

reconditioning and recerti�cation. The standard does not

require the use of original equipment parts, but does require

that “all components must function as originally certi�ed”

which requires OEM equivalence.

Return to top

Concussion Information

What is the helmet’s role in protecting againstconcussions?

Helmets provide a substantial level of protection for serious

head injuries, including concussions, but no helmet canprevent all concussions. Concussions are complex events

that involve many variables that have nothing to do with

helmets or head protection. Concussions are caused by

impacts to the head, neck and other parts of the body that

result in the movement of the brain inside the head.

Concussions can occur anytime a human body collides with

another or with the ground. The reality is that a helmet can’t

stop the brain from moving inside the head.

Changing behaviors and attitudes of players, parents and

coaches is critical. Proper blocking and tackling techniques


http://naera.net/



reduce the number of hits to the head which will reduce the

risk of concussion and other head injuries. This includes

reducing exposure by limiting full contact practices. If a

concussion has been diagnosed, your child should not return

to play until cleared by medically trained experts following

return-to-play guidelines.

Return to top

Does certi�cation to the NOCSAE standard mean that ahelmet prevents concussions?

A helmet certi�ed to a NOCSAE standard provides a

substantial level of protection for serious head injuries,

including concussions. However, the NOCSAE helmet

standard is not a concussion standard, and no helmet can

prevent all concussions, even those certi�ed to the NOCSAE

standard. Currently there are no helmet standards in

existence that are concussion speci�c. NOCSAE has been

and is currently dedicating millions of dollars in concussion

speci�c scienti�c research to try and identify criteria that

could be used in a concussion speci�c helmet standard.

In 2017, NOCSAE �nalized revisions to its existing football

helmet standard to limit maximum rotational forces involved

in many concussions. Rotational accelerations are thought

by the majority of neuroscientists to be more injurious to the

brain than linear accelerations. The revised football helmet

standard goes into e�ect in November 2018 and represents

a critical step forward in addressing concussion risks.

Return to top

Can the NOCSAE helmet test results be used todetermine which helmet is the best helmet forprotecting against concussions?

No. The NOCSAE helmet standard uses a pass/fail threshold

of 1200 SI to determine whether a helmet meets the




standard performance criteria. A helmet must perform

below 1200 SI, by at least three statistical standard

deviations in all demanding impact locations. Once the 1200

SI threshold is met, there is no measurable di�erence in

injury risk based on di�erences in SI scores. For example, a

value of 450 SI isn’t more likely to reduce concussion injury

than 800 SI.

There is no single SI number for any single helmet or model.

A helmet model in any given size alone may have over

10,000 di�erent SI scores from all samples tested, depending

on the number of helmets produced. NOCSAE does not

allow SI-related safety claims about one model or brand over

another because such claims would be scienti�cally

unfounded and misleading to consumers. Regarding

concussion protection claims, there is currently no scienti�c

consensus for a concussion or sub-concussive threshold,

whether that threshold is SI, accelerations in engineering

units or other values. It is a misuse of SI values to make

helmet comparisons, particularly when the comparative

question is concussion protection.

Return to top

How is NOCSAE working to advance concussion researchin sports?

Since 1995, NOCSAE has spent more than $10.5 million on

concussion research by the foremost experts in sports

medicine and science to develop and advance athlete safety.

In 2017, NOCSAE �nalized revisions to its existing football

helmet standard to limit maximum rotational forces involved

in many concussions. Rotational accelerations are thought

by the majority of neuroscientists to be more injurious to the

brain than linear accelerations. The revised football helmet

standard goes into e�ect in November 2018 and represents

a critical step forward in addressing concussion risks.

NOCSAE continues to work to identify criteria that could be

used in a concussion-speci�c helmet standard in the future.




Return to top

Commotio Cordis / Chest ProtectorPerformance Standard for CommotioCordis

What is commotio cordis and how does NOCSAE’s chestprotector performance standard protect against it?

Commotio cordis, a heart rhythm disruption caused by a

blow to the chest, is one of the leading causes of sudden

cardiac death in athletes. The condition is an episode of

ventricular �brillation induced by a direct blow to the chest

over the heart during a speci�c portion of the heart’s

electrical cycle. This can be caused by a direct hit from an

object such as a baseball or lacrosse ball, a lacrosse stick or

even a collision with another player. The impact doesn’t have

to be hard or high velocity. Approximately �ve to 15 athletes

die every year from this event. Most of these deaths are

males under the age of 14, many of whom were wearing a

form of chest protection when they were hit. Commotio

cordis deaths have been recorded in baseball, lacrosse,

football, and soccer, as well as in other recreational activities.

In 2017, NOCSAE �nalized its chest protector standard for

commotio cordis, based on a scienti�c breakthrough in

understanding the cause and prevention of commotio

cordis. In conjunction with research e�orts by the Louis J.

Acompora Memorial Foundation, NOCSAE funded more than

$1.1 million in research to discover the precise cause of

commotio cordis and then determine how to protect against

it. Through a series of NOCSAE funded studies, Dr. Mark

Link, M.D., identi�ed the precise cause of commotio cordis,

including the critical moment of occurrence in the cardiac

cycle. With funding from NOCSAE, research engineers

Cynthia Bir, PhD, and Nathan Dau, PhD, at Wayne State

University were able to develop a mechanical chest

surrogate that mimics the response of the human chest and

heart to testing impacts. With the identi�cation of an injury




prevention threshold by Dr. Link and laboratory validation of

the mechanical chest surrogate, NOCSAE developed the

world’s �rst chest protection standard speci�c for commotio

cordis. Equipment certi�ed to this new standard is expected

to signi�cantly reduce the risk of injury and death from

commotio cordis. The new standards currently are speci�c to

baseball and lacrosse only, but plans are being developed to

include other sports.

Even the best protective equipment cannot prevent all such

injuries, so it is important for coaches, parents, players and

bystanders to be able to recognize the danger if an athlete is

struck in the chest and collapses. Without immediate e�orts

to resuscitate the victim with an automated external

de�brillator (AED), death can occur within just a few minutes.

Coaches, parents and athletes who have access to an AED

and training in CPR will help prevent tragic outcomes from

commotio cordis. When an AED is used within three minutes

of a collapse, survival rates are as high as 89 percent.

Return to top

Are products currently available that meet the NOCSAEchest protector performance standard for commotiocordis? Is the standard required by sports governingbodies?

The NOCSAE chest protector performance standard for

commotio cordis applies to baseball and lacrosse and it will

be in e�ect July 1, 2018. Currently, there are several chest

protectors on the market that meet the standard. For

updates on products that meet the standard, visit

http://www.seinet.org/search/search.php.

The new standard is a recommendation for manufacturers,

but with support from US Lacrosse and the NFHS, NOCSAE is

hopeful that compliance with the standard will be part of the

rules of play in lacrosse and baseball very soon.


http://www.seinet.org/search/search.php



Return to top

Football

(For speci�c questions about concussion risks and protections,

see previous section.)

How can I determine if a helmet meets the NOCSAEhelmet test standard?

Helmets which meet the NOCSAE standard must bear the

seal, “Meets NOCSAE standards” and the logo for that type of

helmet. The seal and logo are permanently branded or

stamped on the outside rear portion of the helmet.

Return to top

How does NOCSAE’s football helmet standard addressyouth and adult players?

The NOCSAE football helmet standard applies to helmets of

all sizes, worn by players of all sizes from youth to adult. The

NOCSAE standards utilize variable-mass bio�delic headforms

to account for the di�erent sized players. Helmet sizes likely

to be worn by players at the youth level are tested on the

smallest headform which represents a 10-year-old male in

the 50 percentile of head mass and shape. As helmet sizes

get larger, headforms with more mass are used in the testing

protocol. The largest headform represents the 95

percentile adult male for head mass and shape.

NOCSAE has been researching the potential bene�ts of

creating a separate standard for helmets designed for youth.

At this time, there is insu�cient data to suggest a distinct

helmet mass limit for youth or other similar performance

changes would provide more injury protection, or would

protect against injury risks not already addressed.

th

th




As we have for years, NOCSAE continues to prioritize this

issue. We are the only standards organization actively

pursuing a youth helmet standard through active research

grants and contract funding. However, NOCSAE will not

develop a standard without solid science from which we can

conclude that taking an action such as limiting helmet mass

will not present an increased risk of injury or otherwise

prohibit the helmet from e�ectively addressing rotational

acceleration-induced injuries.

Return to top

What are the most important factors when selecting afootball helmet?

NOCSAE recommends that helmets be certi�ed as compliant

to the NOCSAE standard, be regularly recerti�ed, and

properly �tted to the individual athlete’s head. Helmets are

designed for safety and performance based on proper �t ―

speci�cally contact with the head.

Return to top

How are football helmets tested?

The NOCSAE helmet testing standards utilize a twin-wire

impactor that relies on gravity to accelerate the headform

and helmet combination to the required impact speeds. The

standard also requires the use of a pneumatic ram impactor

to deliver impacts in locations and directions that are not

possible with the twin wire system. The NOCSAE headform is

a bio�delic and variable-mass headform scienti�cally

instrumented with triaxial accelerometers at the center of

gravity to measure headform accelerations in three di�erent

directions.

The testing involves mounting a football helmet on an

appropriately sized and mass-speci�c headform. The

headform and helmet combination is then dropped at




speci�c velocities onto a steel anvil covered with a ½-inch

hard rubber pad. A single helmet test involves 29 impacts at

seven di�erent impact locations, including three random

impact locations, four lower-velocity impacts, and four

impacts at high temperatures. For the pneumatic ram

testing, the helmet and headform are mounted onto a linear

bearing table and impacted with a pneumatic ram at 19.6

meters per second on six di�erent locations, including one

random location. Helmets must meet the standard at all

impacts in both testing con�gurations.

Return to top

Are all football helmet sizes tested?

No. It would not be feasible to test all helmet sizes. The most

critical sizes are tested in the three or four most common

shell sizes used by most equipment manufacturers. These

sizes have the least amount of stando� distance between

head and shell, and if these shell sizes meet the NOCSAE

standard, it is reasonable to assume the other helmet sizes

in that particular shell would also pass.

Return to top

Lacrosse

How are lacrosse helmets and face masks tested?

Impact by the ball and stick, as well as collision with other

players and turf are the hazards which must be guarded

against in this sport. Consequently, the helmet is mounted

on the appropriate size head model and is subjected to one

drop test from 60 inches onto six speci�ed locations plus a

random location, at ambient temperature. The side of the

helmet is also subjected to a single 60-inch drop immediately

after being stored for four hours at 120 degrees F. The front,

side, rear and two random locations are struck by the ball at

70 mph at ambient temperature, and the side is struck by




the ball at 60 mph, after being stored for four hours at 120

degrees F. Shock measurements are taken by a triaxial

accelerometer mounted at the center of gravity of the head

model to determine if the helmet meets an established

Severity Index tolerance. There is a recerti�cation procedure

which involves one drop from 48 inches onto two locations,

including front and one rotated position, on a su�cient

number of randomly chosen helmets, as well as 100 percent

inspection of all helmets. This procedure forms the basis for

parts replacement and rejection of helmets adequate to

ensure that all helmets leaving the plant will meet the

Standard. Face masks are subjected to ball and stick

penetration and de�ection tests at 55 mph and at ambient

temperature. Neither the ball, stick nor mask must touch the

face. A stick impact test is also conducted at 40 mph after

the helmet and face mask have been stored for four hours at

120 degrees F. Recerti�cation of masks is dependent upon

inspection of all masks. Masks must not be distorted more

than 1/8 inch from a standard form and attaching straps and

hardware must be free of distortion, defect or deterioration

upon disassembly. Manufacturers certify and reconditioners

recertify that helmets meet the respective performance test

standards. NOCSAE does not certify, recertify, approve or

disapprove helmets or any other athletic equipment.

Return to top

What steps can consumers take to ensure lacrosse ballsmeet NOCSAE standards?

In March 2018, NOCSAE issued a warning for lacrosse

players, coaches and teams to use caution when purchasing

lacrosse balls online. NOCSAE is taking aggressive steps to

stop the sale of counterfeit lacrosse balls by multiple

illegitimate vendors, primarily on the Internet, including

working with Amazon, GoDaddy and other online shopping

platforms to shut down vendors selling lacrosse balls that

have not been certi�ed to the NOCSAE standard. Without

proper testing and certi�cation to the NOCSAE standard,




these counterfeit lacrosse balls could pose safety risks for

players. For example, helmets are tested with balls that meet

the standard. Any balls which don’t meet the standard could

penetrate the face guard, break the shell, or bottom-out the

padding if the ball is too hard, too soft, and/or too small.

Consumers should also be aware that many of the

counterfeit lacrosse balls appear to have the proper NOCSAE

and Safety Equipment Institute (SEI) logos, but the vendors in

question are not registered licensees and the balls fail to

meet the NOCSAE standard. Consumers should not rely

solely on the presence of on-ball marking to assess whether

lacrosse balls meet the NOCSAE standard. To ensure these

products have been certi�ed to the NOCSAE standard,

NOCSAE recommends checking the name of the

manufacturer and the ball model against the certi�ed

product list available on the SEI website at www.seinet.org.

Return to top

Baseball/So�ball

Does NOCSAE have a standard for protective headgearfor fast pitch softball pitchers?

NOCSAE has a headgear standard for defensive players in

baseball and softball, which would include the pitcher. This

standard, ND029, speci�es equipment that would provide

only head protection, or head and facial protection. The

standard does not include equipment that provides facial

protection only.

The exposure of a defensive player, including the pitcher, to

serious injury from a batted ball is greater than the exposure

of a base runner. Baseball and softball rules of play, almost

unanimously, specify that a baserunner must wear a helmet

as a minimum level of protection while running the bases.

Some leagues and organizations may also require the

addition of a face guard, but none permit a baserunner to





wear only facial protection. The NOCSAE standard for

baseball and softball defensive players follows the same

logic.

Return to top

Do cheek �ap products meet the NOCSAE standard forface protection?

No. Cheek �ap products cannot meet the NOCSAE standard

for face protection because they do not protect the eyes,

nose and mouth.

Return to top

Do new helmet models that include a built-in cheek �apmeet the NOCSAE standard for face protection?

No. While newer helmet models that include only a built-in

cheek �ap do meet the NOCSAE standard for headprotection, they do not meet the NOCSAE standard for faceprotection.

It’s important to note the di�erence between head

protection – the helmet; and face protection –the face guard.

When purchasing a helmet with a built-in cheek �ap,

consumers should understand that the “Meets NOCSAE

Standard” logo applies to the NOCSAE standard for headprotection. The cheek �ap is not included in that standard

and does not meet the NOCSAE standard for face protection.

Return to top

Are products available that meet the NOCSAE standardfor face protection?Yes. Face guard products that meet the NOCSAE standard

for face protection are widely available. Currently, 11

di�erent brands sell face guards certi�ed to the NOCSAE

standards, not including face guards that are sold as part of




a combination helmet/face guard package. The “Meets

NOCSAE Standard” logo indicates a face guard meets

rigorous safety and quality control criteria and provides

protection for the entire face, including the eyes, nose and

mouth.

Return to top

Why do some youth leagues not allow cheek �aps?While the policies of youth sports leagues vary with each

organization, add-on helmet accessories are often not

allowed because they change the original helmet model. The

addition of an add-on product from a third-party

manufacturer can void the NOCSAE certi�cation, because it

creates a new and untested model, as de�ned by NOCSAE

standards. This policy has been a part of NOCSAE standards

for many years, applies to all NOCSAE standards, and is

typical of certi�cation procedures for other types of personal

protection equipment. See, e.g., NIOSH standards for

respirators and the use of after-market modi�cations.

Return to top

Other Sports

Does NOCSAE have a hockey helmet standard?

While NOCSAE o�ers a standard for hockey helmets, it is not

the standard chosen by the Hockey Equipment Certi�cation

Council (HECC). NOCSAE published its hockey helmet

standard in 2002 after its testing indicated that existing

standards didn’t require the level of protection NOCSAE’s

scienti�c committee would recommend based on the level of

injury exposure in the game. Upon completion, NOCSAE

shared its research �ndings and standard with the HECC for

its consideration. None of the hockey helmets on the market

today are certi�ed to the NOCSAE standard. It’s important to

note that hockey helmets should not be compared directly to


http://nocsae.org/standards/hockey/



helmets designed for football or any other sport. Variations

in frequency and types of exposure must be considered.

Return to top

Players, Parents & CoachesFAQs

Get the Facts

Recerti�cation

Quick LinksStandards Matrix

Apply For Funding

Meetings

FAQs

Terms of Use

Copyright and Permissions

About NOCSAEHistory

Related Websites

Board of Directors

Contact NOCSAE

National Operating Commi�ee

on Standards for Athletic

Equipment


https://nocsae.org/players-parents-coaches/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/faqs/

https://nocsae.org/news-and-media/fact-sheets/

https://nocsae.org/players-parents-coaches/recertification/

https://nocsae.org/standards/standards-matrix/

https://nocsae.org/research-grant-program/apply-for-funding/

https://nocsae.org/meetings/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/faqs/

https://nocsae.org/terms/

https://nocsae.org/copyright/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/history/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/related-websites/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/board-of-directors/

https://nocsae.org/about-nocsae/contact-nocsae/

https://nocsae.org/

https://twitter.com/NOCSAE

https://www.linkedin.com/company/national-operating-committee-on-standards-for-athletic-equipment/

EXHIBIT B


9/6/2019 About Safety Equipment Institute, Inc. (SEI) | sei.micronexx.com

https://www.seinet.org/drupal-7.51/CompanyOverview 1/2

Company Overview (French) INTRODUCTION À SAFETY EQUIPEMENT INSTITUTE

The Safety Equipment Institute (SEI), headquartered in McLean, Virginia, is a private,nonprofit organization established in 1981 to administer the first non-governmental, third-party certification program to test for public safety, and certify a broad range of safetyequipment products. The purpose of SEI’s certification program is to assist governmentagencies along with users and manufacturers of safety equipment in meeting their mutualgoal of protecting the workers and consumers with safety equipment in keeping withrecognized standards and the current state of the art.

Certified products include:

Helmets - baseball, bicycle, equestrian, football, industrial, lacrosse, softball & poloSafety eyewear, face protectorsEmergency eyewash and safetyshowersFall protection equipmentFire service SCBA and rescue toolsFire fighters' helmets, boots and glovesfor wildland, USAR, proximity andstructural fire fightingGas detector tube unitsHazardous materials protectiveensemblesCBRN Protective Ensembles - generalindustry & law enforcementBomb SuitsLaw enforcement restraintsProtective clothing for emergency medical operationsPersonal alert safety systems (PASS) for fire fightersFire service life safety ropeEquestrian vestsAthletic equipment - shin guards, gloves, lacrosse balls, baseballsEscape Smoke HoodsThermal Imaging Cameras

See a Full List of Certified Products

Th SEI tifi ti i l d l d t t ti f ll tifi d f t d

PARTICIPANTS

Menu


https://www.seinet.org/pdfs/En_Francais_Introduction_to_SEI.pdf

https://www.seinet.org/search.htm

https://www.seinet.org/

https://www.seinet.org/drupal-7.51/node/25

javascript:;

9/6/2019 About Safety Equipment Institute, Inc. (SEI) | sei.micronexx.com

https://www.seinet.org/drupal-7.51/CompanyOverview 2/2

The SEI certification programs include annual product testing of all certified safety andprotective equipment product models as well as annual quality assurance audits conductedat the manufacturer’s facility. An affiliate of ASTM International, SEI is accredited by theAmerican National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Standards Council of Canada (SCC),and its programs are operated in accordance with the standard, ISO/IEC 17065, Conformityassessment — Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services. Thismeans that SEI complies with ISO requirements pertaining to impartiality, confidentiality,product testing, audit & inspection and certification.

Policy decisions are handled by the SEI Committee on Certification Programs (CCP), whichincludes representation from the fire service, organized labor, users of safety and protectiveequipment, the insurance industry, and a safety equipment manufacturer. The CCP providestop level organizational commitment to ensuring impartiality, confidentiality and eliminationof conflicts of interests for the SEI Certification Programs.

SEI certification programs are voluntary and available to any manufacturer of safety andprotective equipment. In addition to ensuring compliance with safety regulations, SEIcertified products provide consumers with an additional level of assurance that productsbearing the SEI label have been manufactured to meet the level of quality and performanceof the most current comprehensive standards existing for the product. All product modeltesting is conducted in accordance with the current standards that are promulgated forvarious products by such organizations as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI),ASTM International, Canadian Standards Association (CSA), the National Fire ProtectionAssociation (NFPA), and the National Operating Committee on Standards for AthleticEquipment (NOCSAE). SEI does not develop standards, but actively participates in technicalcommittees (such as ASTM and NFPA) that develop performance testing criteria.

What are the Benefits of SEI Certified Safety Products?Both compliance testing and quality assurance audits are repeated at regular intervals tomaintain certification. The manufacturer submits to on-going scrutiny of their products andprocesses by independent third-parties and agrees to recall non-conforming products.

Another important benefit of SEI certification is the additional assurance granted topurchasers and users of safety products. It means products bearing the SEI mark havebeen manufactured to meet the level of quality and performance of the most currentcomprehensive standards existing for the product.

While SEI does not assume responsibility for product performance, SEI's certification markindicates that the manufacturer is concerned and responsible, and that the model for thatproduct has met the recognized standards for testing and quality assurance.


EXHIBIT C


National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible, and encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries

SEVERITY INDEX FAQS

What is NOCSAE’s helmet standard Severity Index? NOCSAE’s Severity Index (SI) is a threshold value for a general category of head injuries based on scientific research and published data. SI is a method for measuring a helmet’s ability to reduce impact forces to the head, integrating acceleration over time. SI provides an accurate way to assess head injury risk that can be replicated across laboratories and under different impact scenarios. NOCSAE standards are performance-based and are design neutral so that manufacturers are not restricted in design or engineering, allowing innovation in design.

How is SI determined? Football helmet SI values are determined by measuring performance against a range of different impacts from various angles, accelerations and temperatures. The NOCSAE helmet standard uses a pass/fail threshold of 1200 SI to determine whether a helmet meets the standard performance criteria. A helmet must test below 1200 SI in all 16 designated and random impact locations. The SI value tends to vary from impact to impact because it places more emphasis on the duration of the impact than the peak acceleration force. The human brain can withstand very high accelerations if the duration is very short. Head injury tolerance decreases, in general, as the duration of the impact increases.

Why does NOCSAE use a pass/fail threshold instead of a rating value? The SI number is a cutoff point for head injury probability overall. There is no measurable difference in safety of helmets with scores below the 1200 SI threshold. For example, a helmet scoring 400 SI isn’t more likely to reduce injury than one scoring 800 SI. Once the SI value gets below approximately 800 to 900, the change to the risk of injury is essentially immeasurable. Because of the very strict and demanding quality control and quality assurance requirements specified in the NOCSAE standard, helmets certified to the NOCSAE standard will test substantially below 1200 SI, typically in the 400 to 600 SI range.

Why doesn’t NOCSAE release SI values for helmets it certifies? SI figures can be misleading when it comes to helmet performance. NOCSAE does not prevent helmet manufacturers from sharing their SI testing data; however NOCSAE does not allow licensees to make SI-related safety claims about one model or brand over another. There is no single SI score for any helmet model. A single football helmet model has potential 29 different and separate SI values generated by a single certification test, and the numbers for that helmet model will vary from other helmets of the same model, and even from the same production line.

Will helmets with low SI scores prevent concussions? No football helmet can prevent concussions. Because the SI units are not concussion specific, it is impossible to compare the SI scores of one helmet with another and determine which helmet provides better protection. Variables such as helmet fit, the condition and integrity of the padding and energy attenuation system inside the helmet, the current health and concussion history of the player wearing the helmet, and the athlete’s style of play with regard to the use of the head are far more related to the likelihood of concussion than are differences in SI values from one helmet to the next.


EXHIBIT D


1

National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment

1

Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible, and encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries

NOCSAE, the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment, is an independent and nonprofit standards development body with the sole mission to enhance athletic safety through scientific research and the creation of feasible performance standards for protective equipment. Formed in 1970, NOCSAE is a leading force in the effort to improve athletic equipment and provide informational resources to the public, with the goal of improving athlete safety. NOCSAE efforts include the development of performance and test standards for football helmets and facemasks, football gloves; baseball and softball batter’s helmets and face protectors, catcher’s helmets with faceguards, and baseballs; ice hockey helmets; soccer shin guards; lacrosse helmets and facemasks, lacrosse balls; field hockey headgear and field hockey balls; chest protectors in lacrosse and baseball for commotio cordis; and polo helmets.

Football Helmet Standards Overview

1

May 2018

First Football Helmet Standard to Address Concussion Risks from Rotational Forces

In January 2017, the NOCSAE Standards Committee finalized revisions to its existing football helmet standard that limits maximum rotational forces involved in many concussions. The new football helmet performance standard incorporates rotational accelerations in the pass/fail specifications. Rotational accelerations are thought by the majority of neuroscientists to be more injurious to the brain than linear accelerations. This standard incorporates the pneumatic ram test standard finalized in January 2016. Manufacturers will be required to meet the new football helmet performance standard beginning in November 2018.

NOCSAE’s football helmet standard applies to helmets of all sizes, worn by players of all sizes from youth to adult.

The NOCSAE standards utilize variable-mass biofidelic headforms to account for the different-size players. Helmet sizes likely to be worn by players at the youth level are tested on the smallest headform which represents a 10-year-old male in the 50th percentile of head mass and shape.

As helmet sizes get larger, headforms with more mass are used in the testing protocol. The largest headform represents the 95th percentile adult male for head mass and shape.

NOCSAE’s Football Helmet Standard Applies to Youth and Adult Players

Third-Party Helmet Certification

“Meets NOCSAE Standard®”

In January 2015, NOCSAE began requiring third-party certification of compliance with NOCSAE standards, in accordance with ANSI/ISO 17065 international guidelines. This program replaced manufacturers’ self-certification of compliance with NOCSAE standards. Third-party certification is the gold standard for product compliance and conformance and involves independent on-site audits of a manufacturer’s quality assurance and quality control programs, evaluation of production testing data, and independent certification testing on randomly selected samples. When all of the requirements provided in NOCSAE standards are met, this accredited body issues a letter of certification for each specific manufacturer’s model.


22

Third-party certification of compliance with NOCSAE standards is done by the Safety Equipment Institute (SEI); an independent ANSI/ISO 17065 accredited certifying body. SEI manages the NOCSAE standards certification testing through several accredited, independent laboratories that are responsible for testing to determine if products meet NOCSAE standards. SEI also conducts regular product testing and quality assurance audits of each manufacturer to assure continued compliance. SEI publishes a current list on its website of all athletic equipment it has certified as compliant with NOCSAE standards. See SEI certified athletic equipment.

Setting the Standard

NOCSAE helmet performance standards are based on accepted and recognized scientific and medical data. Using input from physicians, academic researchers, coaches, certified trainers, manufacturers and leading scientific experts, NOCSAE establishes standards that test football helmet performance across multiple impact velocities and locations. Helmets either pass or fail the standard based on their ability to reduce impact forces to the head as measured by a Severity Index (SI) value. Because of the very high level of quality assurance required to pass the test, helmets must score substantially less than 1200 SI for all impacts. NOCSAE standards are performance-based and have always been design neutral so manufacturers are not restricted in design or engineering, which in turn provides freedom for innovation in design.

In 2004, after significant research and investigation, NOCSAE drafted a proposed revision to its helmet testing standard that would allow helmets to be hit in additional directions and with different speeds, which NOCSAE believed would be necessary once consensus science identified a basis for a concussion-specific addition to the NOCSAE standard. This test standard was finalized in January 2016.

The pneumatic impactor is an air-powered ram based on plans developed by NFL research and given to NOCSAE in a cooperative effort.

Pneumatic Ram Impactor

How Helmets are Tested

The NOCSAE helmet testing standards utilize a twin-wire impactor that relies on gravity to accelerate the headform and helmet combination to the required impact speeds. The standard also requires the use of a pneumatic ram impactor to deliver impacts in locations and directions that are not possible with the twin wire system. The NOCSAE headform is a biofidelic and variable-mass headform scientifically instrumented with triaxial accelerometers at the center of gravity to measure headform accelerations in three different directions.

The testing involves mounting a football helmet on an appropriately sized and mass-specific headform. The headform and helmet combination is then dropped at specific velocities onto a steel anvil covered with a ½-inch hard rubber pad. A single helmet test involves 29 impacts at seven different impact locations, including three random impact locations, four lower-velocity impacts, and four impacts at high temperatures.

For the pneumatic ram testing, the helmet and headform are mounted onto a linear bearing table and impacted with a pneumatic ram at 19.6 meters per second on six different locations, including one random location. Helmets must meet the standard at all impacts in both testing configurations.


http://www.seinet.org/search/search.php

http://www.nocsae.org/standards/documents.html

33

Recertification of Reconditioned Helmets

Shortly after the first NOCSAE football helmet standard was published, American Reconditioning Inc. decided to test helmets that were being reconditioned. This testing showed that 84 percent of all helmets in use at that time, and made before 1973, could not pass the NOCSAE test. As a result, NOCSAE established a standard to permit the recertification of football helmets to the original standard applicable when the helmets were new. There are currently 22 reconditioners nationally that are licensed by NOCSAE to recertify football helmets.

Recertification Requirements Under the NOCSAE Standard

The NOCSAE recertification standards and recertification license agreement require the following:

The Facility: The testing laboratory at each reconditioning facility must be in a separate room apart from the general reconditioning work. The room must be temperature controlled at a specified range. Compliance also requires a written quality control protocol that includes issues such as sample selection protocol and documentation of responses to any test failures.

The Sample: Helmets selected for testing must be a statistically significant sample of the helmet models that will likely be reconditioned and recertified that year. The helmets selected for testing must be tested prior to any reconditioning or repair work being done. This means the helmets are tested in the condition they were in as of the last play of the last game of the last season. Once the helmet is selected, it is

tagged, tested and followed through the entire recertification process, and when the process is finished that exact helmet is tested again. No helmets in the batches represented by those samples may be recertified or returned to a school or club until all the samples have passed the post-reconditioning testing.

The Test: Reconditioners use the same drop-testing equipment for recertification as is required for newly manufactured helmets. The entire testing process and data collection process is controlled by NOCSAE computer software specifically developed to ensure that the recertification testing data is accurate, valid and reliable.

The testing software:

• Requires successful equipment calibration and recalibration both before and after helmets are tested; if the post-test calibration and validation fails, helmet tests cannot be used for recertification, and they must be redone after calibration issues are corrected.


44

• Dumps all invalid test data generated as a result of a non-calibrated or invalid test into a special file for review by the NOCSAE technical advisor.

• Collects all valid and verified testing data – including date; time of day; temperature; SI results; helmet make and model, age and size; and the last year reconditioned – and stores it in a separate encrypted file, accessible only by specific personnel in the laboratory of the NOCSAE technical advisor.

• Currently NOCSAE has more than 12 million data points from recertification testing that covers more than 500,000 helmets of all models, years and sizes.

Reconditioning: Once the pre-reconditioning test is complete, the helmet begins the reconditioning process. Reconditioning includes the complete disassembly of all helmet parts, cleaning, sanitizing, replacement of worn parts and shell inspection. Helmets also may be repainted and have the faceguard, jaw pad and chin strap replaced. Once the helmet has finished the reconditioning process, the shell may be the only original part of the helmet that remains. In a helmet older than five years that has been regularly reconditioned, the only part of the helmet that is actually five years old is probably the shell. Helmet shells cannot be replaced as part of the reconditioning process.

Recertification: When the sample helmets have passed the recertification tests, a recertification label with the current year’s recertification date and a statement that the helmet has been recertified to the NOCSAE standard is placed on the inside of all the helmets represented by those samples that were tested. In addition, a permanent label containing the recertification logo may be placed on the outside of the helmet indicating the year of recertification.

Round Robin: Reconditioners also must submit their testing systems to a round-robin calibration program to validate that each reconditioning and recertification laboratory test rig is properly tuned and assembled. The NOCSAE technical director coordinates this calibration process.

Additional Requirements: Licensed reconditioners are required to provide testing data results to NOCSAE when requested. NOCSAE analyzes this data and maintains a database of all recertification tests performed from all reconditioners licensed to recertify helmets.

RFID Technology: NOCSAE is funding and validating a helmet identification system using a passive RFID label technology. This program uniquely identifies each individual helmet and provides an easy method for inventory, tracking the history of reconditioning and recertification testing, and providing consumer access to model and helmet age information and the status of the original new helmet certification. This program is in the third year of evaluation and development, and so far the results have been very favorable.


EXHIBIT E


NOCSAE®

"Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible, and encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries."

The National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment

11020 King Street, Suite 215 Overland Park, KS 66210 913-888-1340 Fax: 913-498-8817 www.nocsae.org July 16, 2013

NOCSAE statement on third party helmet add-on products and certification There are many new products on the market that are intended to be added to helmets, in particular football helmets, which products claim to reduce concussions and make helmets safer and more protective. Whether these are additional liners or padding on the inside, or bumpers, pads, coverings or electronic devices that attach to the outside of the helmet, these products were not included in the certification testing and quality control programs that are required for all helmets that are certified to the NOCSAE standards. To address this situation, and to protect the integrity of the NOCSAE standards, the NOCSAE board of directors has adopted the following position:

“NOCSAE helmet standards are specific to models which are identical in all aspects, except as to size. The testing required to support the certification is also specific to the model being certified. NOCSAE standards require that any change in configuration, padding, shell geometry, or protective system requires a new model designation with separate certification testing. The addition of after-market items by anyone that changes or alters the protective system by adding or deleting protective padding to the inside or outside of the helmet, or which changes or alters the geometry of the shell or adds mass to the helmet, whether temporary or permanent, voids the certification of compliance with the NOCSAE standard.”


http://www.nocsae.org/

EXHIBIT F


NOCSAE® "Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible,

and encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries."


NEWS

For Immediate Release: Contact: August 8, 2013 Adam Montgomery 314-982-8795 [email protected]

Certification to NOCSAE Standards and Add-on Helmet Products

OVERLAND PARK, Kansas – August 8, 2013 - The National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) has released the following statement regarding equipment certified to NOCSAE standards and add-on helmet products.

“Products designed to be added to a football helmet are being marketed and sold; some are intended to measure impacts, while others are expressly marketed as improving a helmet’s performance. Some products claim the ability to protect against concussions. Regardless of the truth of such claims, the addition of those products to a certified helmet changes the model, by definition, under the NOCSAE standards.

“For many years NOCSAE standards have defined a helmet model as a helmet “intended to be identical in every way, except for size.” Any changes, additions or alterations of the model, except for size, color or graphics, even if made by the original manufacturer, require that a new model name be created and a separate certification testing process begin for that new model. This concept of limiting certification to a specific model is commonly found in national and international helmet standards.

NOCSAE itself does not certify any product, it does not “approve” or “disapprove” of any product, and has no authority to grant exemptions or waivers to the requirements imposed by the standards it writes.

The addition of an item(s) to a helmet previously certified without those item(s) creates a new untested model. Whether the add-on product changes the performance or not, the helmet model with the add-on product is no longer “identical in every aspect” to the one originally certified by the manufacturer.

When this happens, the manufacturer which made the original certification has the right, under the NOCSAE standards, to declare its certification void. It also can decide to engage in additional certification testing of the new model and certify the new model with the add-on product, but it is not required to do so.

Companies which make add-on products for football helmets have the right to make their own certification of compliance with the NOCSAE standards on a helmet model, but when that is done, the certification and responsibility for the helmet/third-party product combination would become theirs, (not the helmet manufacturer). That certification would be subject to the same obligations applicable to the original helmet manufacturer regarding certification testing, quality control and quality assurance and licensure with NOCSAE.

Products such as skull caps, headbands, mouth guards, ear inserts or other items that are not attached or incorporated in some way into the helmet are not the types of products that create a new model as defined in the NOCSAE standards and are not items which change the model definition.”


NOCSAE® "Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible,

and encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries."


About NOCSAE NOCSAE, the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment, is an independent and nonprofit standard-setting body with the sole mission to enhance athletic safety through scientific research and the creation of performance standards for protective equipment. Formed in 1970, NOCSAE is a leading force in the effort to improve athletic equipment and, as a result, reduce injuries. NOCSAE efforts include the development of performance and test standards for football helmets, gloves and facemasks, baseball and softball batters’ and catchers’ helmets, baseballs and softballs, ice hockey helmets, soccer shin guards, lacrosse helmets and facemasks and polo helmets. NOCSAE is comprised of a board of directors representing stakeholders from a number of groups – including consumer and end users, equipment manufacturers and reconditioners, athletic trainers, coaches, equipment managers, and academic and sports medicine associations. These diverse interests have joined forces in an attempt to arrive at a common goal of reducing sports-related injuries. NOCSAE is a nonprofit, charitable organization supported by individuals and organizations with an interest in athletics. For more information, please visit www.nocsae.org.



EXHIBIT G


NOCSAE®

National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible, and

encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries

For Immediate Release Media Contact: Terry Hoffmann O: 314-982-0298 | M: 310-614-3531

[email protected]

Certification to NOCSAE Standards and Add-On Helmet Products

OVERLAND PARK, Kan. (May 8, 2018) – The National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) has released the following statement regarding equipment certified to NOCSAE standards and add-on helmet products. Products designed to be added to previously certified helmets for baseball, softball, football, lacrosse and other sports are being marketed and sold to consumers. Whether intended to be general improvements or expansions of the helmet’s protective coverage or ability, or to collect impact data, the addition of such products to a helmet previously certified as meeting the appropriate NOCSAE® standard will make the certification voidable by the helmet manufacturer. Such additions to the helmet create a new and untested model, as defined in the NOCSAE standards. For many years NOCSAE standards have defined a helmet model as a helmet “intended to be identical in every way, except for size.” Any changes, additions or alterations of the model, except for size or color or graphics, even if made by the original manufacturer, requires that a new model name be created, and a separate certification testing data for that new model. This concept of limiting certification to a specific model is commonly found in national and international helmet standards established by other standards organizations including the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Snell Foundation.

• NOCSAE, itself, does not certify any product, it does not “approve” or “disapprove” of any product, and has no authority to grant exemptions or waivers to the requirements imposed by the standards it writes.

• The addition of an item(s) to a helmet previously certified without the item(s) creates a new untested model. Whether the add-on product improves the performance or not, the helmet model with the add-on product is no longer “identical in every aspect” to the one originally certified by the manufacturer.

• When this happens, the helmet manufacturer has the right, under the NOCSAE standards, to declare its certification void. It may elect to allow the certification to remain unaffected, or it may also decide to engage in additional certification testing of the new model and certify the new model with the add-on product, but it is not required to do so.

• Products such as skull caps, headbands, mouth guards, ear inserts or other items that are not attached or incorporated in some way into the helmet are not the types of products that create a new model as defined in the NOCSAE standards, and are not items which change the model definition.

More information on all NOCSAE standards is available at www.nocsae.org.

###


mailto:[email protected]


NOCSAE®

National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment Commissioning research and establishing standards for athletic equipment, where feasible, and

encouraging dissemination of research findings on athletic equipment and sports injuries

About NOCSAE NOCSAE, the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment, is an independent and nonprofit standards development body with the mission to enhance athletic safety through scientific research and the creation of performance standards for athletic equipment. Formed in 1970, NOCSAE is a leading force in the effort to improve athletic equipment and, as a result, reduce injuries. NOCSAE efforts include the development of performance and test standards for football helmets, gloves and facemasks, baseball and softball batter’s and catcher’s helmets, baseballs and softballs, ice hockey helmets, soccer shin guards, lacrosse helmets and facemasks, and polo helmets. NOCSAE is comprised of a board of directors representing stakeholders from numerous groups – including consumer and end users, equipment manufacturers and reconditioners, athletic trainers, coaches, equipment managers, and academic and sports medicine associations. These diverse interests have joined forces to reduce sports-related injuries. NOCSAE is a nonprofit, charitable organization supported by individuals and organizations with an interest in athletics. For more information, please visit www.nocsae.org.



EXHIBIT H


EXHIBIT I


9/11/2019 Updated - Riddell Response to Address Aftermarket Accessories and NOCSAE Certification | Riddell Newsroom

news.riddell.com/info/releases/updated-riddell-response-to-address-aftermarket-accessories-and-nocsae-certification 1/2

Go to Riddell.comSearch Our Newsroom Search

Updated - Riddell Response to Address Aftermarket Accessories andNOCSAE CertificationAugust 17, 2018

Football helmets and face masks worn by professional, collegiate, high school and most youth football players are required to meet NationalOperating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) performance standards. NOCSAE certification is conducted by SafetyEquipment Institute (SEI), an ISO 17065 conformity assessment organization. The certification process involves rigorous internal product testing,independent laboratory testing and a sound quality assurance program. Each helmet and face mask model is certified by SEI to meet NOCSAEperformance standards. The certification is void if the helmet or face mask is modified in any way. Riddell recommends against the use of any thirdparty aftermarket accessories that alter the fit, form or function of the helmet or face mask as such modifications void the NOCSAE certification andrender the helmet or face mask illegal for most organized play.

ResourcesBrowse Multimedia

VideoUsage Policy

Frequently Requested InformationContact UsAbout RiddellPress ReleasesPress KitRiddell Fact SheetProduct Fact Sheets

Additional ResourcesPartnershipsIn the NewsConcussion ResourcesHelmet Fitting GuidesStudent ResourcesResearchDonation Request FormBRG Sports WebsiteRiddell Careers

Media Contacts

Media [email protected]

Subscribe

Subscribe to RSSReceive Email AlertsShare this Page

Connect With Us

TwitterFacebook

prevnext


http://news.riddell.com/

http://riddell.com/

http://news.riddell.com/multimedia/videos

http://news.riddell.com/multimedia/usage

http://news.riddell.com/info/contact

http://news.riddell.com/info/about

http://news.riddell.com/info/releases

http://news.riddell.com/info/presskits

news.riddell.com/_gallery/get_file/?file_id=5ac388372cfac273d616ea9d&ir=1&file_ext=.pdf

http://news.riddell.com/info/product-fact-sheets

http://news.riddell.com/partnerships

http://news.riddell.com/resources/coverage

http://news.riddell.com/resources/concussion

http://news.riddell.com/resources/helmet-fitting-guides

http://news.riddell.com/resources/student

http://news.riddell.com/resources/research

http://news.riddell.com/resources/donation-page

http://www.brgsports.com/

http://news.riddell.com/careers


http://news.riddell.com/rss

http://news.riddell.com/alerts

https://twitter.com/RiddellSports

https://www.facebook.com/RiddellSports

http://news.riddell.com/info/releases/updated-riddell-response-to-address-aftermarket-accessories-and-nocsae-certification

http://news.riddell.com/info/releases/updated-riddell-response-to-address-aftermarket-accessories-and-nocsae-certification

9/11/2019 Updated - Riddell Response to Address Aftermarket Accessories and NOCSAE Certification | Riddell Newsroom

news.riddell.com/info/releases/updated-riddell-response-to-address-aftermarket-accessories-and-nocsae-certification 2/2

YouTube

www.brgsports.com www.riddell.com

© 2019 Riddell Sports. All Rights Reserved.


http://www.youtube.com/user/RiddellSports

http://www.brgsports.com/

http://www.riddell.com/

EXHIBIT J


{DocNo. 02512956 }


EXHIBIT K


9/11/2019 Football Helmet Warning & Warranty | Xenith

https://www.xenith.com/pages/warning-warranty 1/4

HELMET WARNING

No helmet can guarantee prevention of serious head or any neck injuries, which may occur as a result

of playing football, including brain injury from a concussion. This helmet is not intended to o�er any

protection from neck injury. To reduce the risk of head or any neck injury, do not use your head to make

contact with an opposing player. Keep your head in an upright position and do not use this helmet to

butt, ram or spear any player. Such use is in violation of football rules and can result in severe head and

neck injuries, including but not limited to concussions, paralysis or death, as well as injury to an

opponent.

You should immediately report any of the following symptoms to your trainer, doctor, coach and parents:

“seeing stars,” disorientation, confusion, wooziness, dizziness, loss of balance, loss of memory,

headache, neck or spine pain, nausea, vomiting, or any other symptom you believe may be the result of

an impact to the head. If you experience any of the above symptoms, discontinue all football activities

until you have received written medical clearance and all symptoms have resolved for an extended

period of time.

Ignoring this warning may lead to additional and more serious injury, including potentially fatal second

impact syndrome. Removal of any warning label on this helmet will void, as to that helmet, the helmet

warranty and any indemni�cation or contribution right that may exist.

XENITH FOOTBALL HELMETWARRANTY

Football helmet warranty: Xenith warrants helmet shells to be free from defects in material and

workmanship for a period of �ve (5) years from date of shipment for all varsity and youth polycarbonate

shells and for a period of three (3) years from date of shipment for youth abs shells. The assembled

liner (including the interior liner, all shock absorbers, jaw plates and hook/loop attachments) are

warranted for a period of two (2) years from the date of shipment; comfort pads are warranted for one

(1) year only. If, during the warranty period, the helmet shell and/or liner fail in the course of normal use

due to material defect, dealer, (not other parties having physical possession of the equipment) shall

notify Xenith and request a return authorization. The defective unit shall then be returned to Xenith's

repair center by dealer, freight prepaid, with a failure report along with the place and dates of

reconditioning. It will either be repaired or replaced, at Xenith's option, and returned to dealer or its

designate, freight prepaid. Duties, tari�s and transportation insurance associated with such return shall

be dealer's responsibility. The foregoing warranty shall not apply to defects resulting from: 1) improper

or inadequate maintenance by dealer or its customers; or, 2) unauthorized modi�cation, misuse or

2 0 % O F F A p p a r e l & Ac c e s s o r i e s . E n t e r U P G R A D E 2 0 a t c h e c k o u t .

T H E H U D D L E X E N I T H I N N O VAT I O N T E A M S A L E S

R E C O N D I T I O N I N G S U P P O RT H U B

HELMETS SHOULDER PADS APPAREL ACCESSOR IES


https://www.xenith.com/pages/apparel

https://www.xenith.com/


https://www.xenith.com/cart

https://www.xenith.com/pages/the-huddle

https://www.xenith.com/pages/xenith-technology

https://www.xenith.com/pages/team-sales

https://www.xenith.com/pages/reconditioning

https://www.xenith.com/pages/support

https://www.xenith.com/pages/football-helmets

https://www.xenith.com/pages/shoulder-pads


https://www.xenith.com/pages/accessories?p=perform




accidents.

Dealer may replace worn components (facemasks, facemask clips, snap buckles, chin straps, chin cups)

with only Xenith approved replacement parts. Dealer shall inform its customers that Xenith

recommends: 1) annual reconditioning of each helmet by a Xenith authorized reconditioner and that

failure to do so may adversely a�ect the performance of the helmet; 2) that helmets be retired from

service not later than ten (10) years after initial use; and 3) that shock absorbers should never be

swapped from its original location to another within the interior liner (see shock absorber alteration

warning below.) This warranty shall be void as a result of any of the following:1) repairs or alterations

made to a helmet which modify or alter the helmet including the removal of any warning labels. 2) use of

helmet replacement parts other than Xenith approved replacement parts.3) the application of any

unapproved device or material to the helmet. 4) failure to use a Xenith authorized helmet reconditioner.

(a list of authorized reconditioners as of the e�ective date is attached to this agreement; an updated

list may be obtained from Xenith’s customer service department or at www.Xenith.com.) 5) failure to

recondition the helmet at least once every two (2) years.

Warranty exclusions: except as noted, the following components are not warranted: chin pieces, low and

high chin straps, snap buckles, facemasks, facemask clips, and fastening hardware including but not

limited to t-nuts, screws and snaps. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Xenith warrants the hybrid strap

and chin cup assemblies for one (1) year.

Shock absorber alteration warning: Xenith uses several types of shock absorbers in every football

helmet. Each type of shock absorber is designed di�erently and strategically placed in the interior liner

to achieve the desired performance. Shock absorbers may not be interchanged or swapped from one

location to another. Altering the shock absorber con�guration could adversely a�ect the performance of

the helmet. Xenith disclaims any responsibility or liability resulting from unauthorized alteration of the

shock absorber con�guration. Dealer may only replace worn or damaged jaw and crown shock absorbers

on football helmets with identical Xenith replacement parts.

© 2016 Xenith, llc. All rights reserved. All other trademarks and/or service marks are the property of

their respective owners. Xenith, the Xenith logos, adaptive head protection, aware-�ow, �t seeker, and

shock bonnet are trademarks and/or servicemarks registered in the us and other countries and owned

by Xenith, llc.

BEGIN MY WARRANTY REQUESTBEGIN MY WARRANTY REQUEST

JO IN TEAM XEN ITH

Sign up to receive exclusive Xenith

discounts and product updates.

Enter your email address... SIGN UP






https://www.xenith.com/pages/service

















CONNECT W ITH US

SHOP

Helmets

Shoulder Pads

Apparel

Accessories

Reconditioning

Team Sales

Digital Gift Cards

OUR STORY

Technology

About Us

Testimonials

Partners

Careers

The Come Up

Press Room

HELP

Contact Us

Order Status

Service

FAQs

Fit Page & Manuals

Parent Player Coach2 0 % O F F A p p a r e l & Ac c e s s o r i e s . E n t e r U P G R A D E 2 0 a t c h e c k o u t .





https://www.facebook.com/xenith

https://www.instagram.com/xenith

https://www.youtube.com/user/XenithChannel

https://www.twitter.com/xenithfootball




https://www.xenith.com/pages/accessories



https://www.xenith.com/pages/gift-card


https://www.xenith.com/pages/about-us

https://www.xenith.com/pages/testimonials

https://www.xenith.com/pages/partners

https://quickenloans.wd5.myworkdayjobs.com/rocket_careers

https://www.xenith.com/pages/athlete-stories

https://www.xenith.com/pages/press-room

https://www.xenith.com/pages/contact-us

https://www.xenith.com/pages/order-status

https://www.xenith.com/pages/service

https://www.xenith.com/pages/xenith-faq

https://www.xenith.com/pages/fitting-guide

















Safety Brie�ng

© 2019 Xenith, LLC. All rights reserved. XENITH®, XENITH SHADOW™ and X™ are

trademarks, service marks, or registered trademarks of Xenith, LLC., in the United

States and other countries. This allows us to not use the Register Mark or TM on

logos.

Return/Warranty Terms Privacy






https://www.xenith.com/pages/safety

https://www.xenith.com/pages/returns

https://www.xenith.com/pages/terms

https://www.xenith.com/pages/privacy















EXHIBIT L


9/11/2019 Schutt Sports | Frequently Asked Questions | Schutt Store

https://www.schuttsports.com/faq/index/index/ 1/3

ORDER INFO

HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE FOR MY ORDER TO ARRIVE?

WHAT DOES NEXT DAY SHIPPING MEAN?

DO YOU OFFER EXPEDITED SHIPPING?

WHERE'S MY ORDER?

CAN I USE MY TAX EXEMPT STATUS ONLINE?

WARRANTY INFORMATION/RETURNS

WHAT IS YOUR HELMET WARRANTY?

Football Helmet Warranty For complete details on the helmet warranty, warnings and helmet care be sure toreview the football helmet fitting guide that can be found on this website. Important — Warranty -—Performance You may replace or change any part or component of the Schutt Helmet System as long as youfollow the manufacturer’s guidelines. However, alterations, additions or any component deletions or removalsyou make to the helmet may void this warranty and could adversely affect the protective capabilities of thehelmet. Should there ever be any question regarding the warranty, evaluation or function of a helmet and/or

Email Address*

Password*

LOG IN

REGISTER

FAQS

Search ...


javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

https://www.schuttsports.com/customer/account/forgotpassword/

https://www.schuttsports.com/customer/account/create/

https://www.schuttsports.com/



the component parts, please contact Schutt Sports for a free helmet inspection. Paint Warning Substancesapplied to the helmet shell which are not compatible with the shell material can cause deterioration,embrittlement and/or breakage, thereby exposing the wearer to unnecessary risk and danger. Usage of non-compatible parts, polishes and/or cleaners will render the helmet shell unsafe for further use and will voidwarranties. Use only Schutt approved primer, paint, thinner, polishes, and cleaners. For proper helmetpainting, contact a NAERA Licensed Reconditioner or Schutt Service Center. Failure to comply can destroyshell integrity and void warranties. If you have any questions concerning paint application, please call SchuttSports at 800.426.9784 Helmet Warranty The warranty for poly-carbonate shells is five (5) years. In order tohonor the shell warranty (after the first year of use), reconditioning by a NAERA certified reconditioner isrequired every other year. Use only factory replacement parts to validate the warranty. The warranty for ABSshells is three (3) years. Although reconditioning is not required to validate the warranty period for youthhelmets, it is recommended that a regular repair and replacement program be adopted until the helmet isretired. Air liners are warranted for a period of one (1) year. Helmets covered under the warranties should bereturned in whole with all internal components intact to the Schutt Sports dealer from whom purchased, alongwith evidence of the purchase date, for return to the Schutt Sports Manufacturing Company. Schutt willinspect the helmet and will determine the disposition of repair or adjustments, or replacement free of charge.Use of Third Party and After-Market Products on Schutt Products All Schutt helmets and faceguards aremanufactured and certified to meet the current NOCSAE performance standards. Alterations, additions or anycomponent deletions or removals made to the helmet or faceguard that do not follow the manufacturer’sguidelines may void any applicable warranty to the product and will void the NOCSAE certification of thehelmet and faceguard. Schutt Sports recommends against the use of any third party, aftermarket product oraccessory that alters the fit, form or function of the helmet or faceguard. Third party, aftermarket productsthat are used on a Schutt helmet and do not follow manufacturer’s guidelines will void the NOCSAEcertification and make the helmet or face mask illegal to use in most organized football leagues, games orother activities.

WHAT IS YOUR RETURN POLICY?

Please contact customer service at 1-800-426-9784 or [email protected] for returninstructions. Visit the Return page for more specifications.

CAN I RETURN MY CUSTOM PAINTED HELMET?

Custom painted helmets are painted specifically to your specifications. They cannot be returned. If the fittingis not right, a new liner can be ordered in a different size.

HELMET FITTING AND PAINT STYLES

HOW DO I PROPERLY FIT MY HELMET?

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN PAINT FINISHES?

WHY DON’T THE COLORS OF THE HELMET APPEAR EXACTLY AS THEY DID ON MY SCREEN?

HELMET CARE

HOW DO I CARE FOR MY FOOTBALL HELMET?


javascript:void(0)


javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

javascript:void(0)

EXHIBIT M


Oak Park - Main Office25900 Greenfield Road. Suite 650Oak Park, Michigan 48237Tel.: (248) 968-5200

Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park

& VAN HELLEMONT, P.C.

November 16,2018

Grand Rapids625 Kenmoor Avenue, S.E., Suite 304

Grand Rapids. Michigan 49546Tel.: (616)949-5700Fax:(616)949-5704

Email: hcwsimto vanhcwDc.com

Via Certified & US Mail

7016 0340 0000 9038 9035

Corporation Service Companyc/o Registered Agent forRiddell Incorporated84 State Street

Boston, MA 02109-2202

Re: Mayfield Athletics, S.A.F.E. Clip, and Zuti FacemasksFile No: 900.016449

Dear Sir or Madam:

Please be advised that Hewson and Van Hellemont, P.C., has been retained by MayfieldAthletics to represent it in all matters, specifically including issues surrounding the S.A.F.E. Clipand Zuti Facemask.

Your company is hereby directed to cease and desist all statements, representations, andpublications indicating that the use of the S.A.F.E. Clip and/or the Zuti Facemask with yourhelmets would be illegal and/or violate your respective helmet warranties, as published to thepublic. Further, your company is directed to cease and desist indicating that either of theseproducts would violate the applicable NOCSAE standards, which is an untrue representationregarding those standards.

The use of afler-market products is not only allowed, but encouraged by the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, and your claims—made by your sales personnel and at various tradeshows—that the use of these after-market products will violate your warranty is patently untrue.

Your company's misrepresentations regarding the use of these products constitutes anunlawful interference in the reasonable business expectancies of our client and must ceaseimmediately. Further, these misrepresentations are false and slanderous in unequivocally statingthat the use of these products is illegal.

Accordingly, we demand that your company (A) immediately cease and desist your false,misleading, and defamatory statements regarding S.A.F.E. Clip and Zuti Facemask; and, (B)provide us with prompt written assurance that you will cease and desist from furthermisrepresentations and defamation of these products and of Mayfield Athletics.

If your company does not comply with this cease and desist demand within ten days,Mayfield Athletics is entitled to seek monetary damages and equitable relief based on yourmisrepresentations and your defamation. Furthermore, in the event that your company fails tocomply, please be advised that Mayfield Athletics has asked us to communicate to you that it

{DocNo. 02068051 } www.vanhewpc.com


tt VAN HELUMOm-, RC

Mayfield Athletics, S.A.F.E. Clip, and Zuti FacemasksNovember 16, 2018Page 2

will pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief,and an order that your company pay its court costs and attorney fees. Your company's liabilityand exposure under such legal action could be considerable.

Prior to taking these steps, however, my client wishes to give you the opportunity todiscontinue this illegal conduct by complying with this demand within ten days.

We look forward to hearing from you within that time.

I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding this matter. If you or yourattorney have any questions, please contact me directly.

Very truly yours,

HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT, P.C.

ames F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: Mr. Dan Arment

Corporation Service Company - Austin, TXIllinois Corporation Service Co - Springfield, ILPrentice-Hall Corp. System - Jefferson City, MO

{DocNo. 02068051 }


Oak Park — Main Office25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650Oak Park, Michigan 48237

Tel.: (248) 968-5200Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park


November 16, 2018

Grand Rapids625 Kenmoor Avenue, S.E.. Suite 304

Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546Tel.: (616) 949-5700

Fax: (616)949-5704

Email: hL'[email protected]


7016 0340 0000 9022 6682

C T Corporation Systemc/o Registered Agent forSchutt Sports, Inc.208 S. La Salle Street, Suite 814

Chicago, IL 60604-1101


Dear Sir or Madam:



The use of after-market products is not only allowed, but encouraged by the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, and your claims—^made by your sales personnel and at various tradeshows—that the use of these after-market products will violate your warranty is patently untrue.




{DocNo. 02068120} www. vanhewpc. com


IC VAN HELUMONT. ftC






Very truly yours,


es F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: Mr. Robert Erb

CT Corporation System - Columbus, OH

{DocNo. 02068120}


■

Oak Park - Main Office S Grand Rapids25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650 O 625 Kenmoor Avenue, S.E., Suite 304Oak Park. Michigan 48237 N Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546Tel.: (248) 968-5200 ^ VAN HELLEMONT, P.C. Tel.: (616) 949-5700Fax: (248) 968-5270 Fax: (616) 949-5704

Reply to: Oak Park Email: hcwsonf«'vanhewDc.com

November 16, 2018


7016 0340 0000 9038 9042

Corporation Service Company d/b/aCSC-Lawyers Incorporating Service Coc/o Registered Agent forRiddell Incorporated211 E. 7^ Street, Suite 620Austin, TX 78701-3218


Dear Sir or Madam:



The use of after-market products is not only allowed, but encouraged by the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, and your claims—made by your sales personnel and at various tradeshows—that the use of these after-market products will violate your warranty is patently untrue.



If your company does not comply with this cease and desist demand within ten days,Mayfield Athletics is entitled to seek monetary damages and equitable relief based on yourmisrepresentations and your defamation. Furthermore, in the event that your company fails to

{DocNo. 02068061 } www.vatihcwpc.com


wIt VAN HELLmONT.RC


comply, please be advised that Mayfield Athletics has asked us to communicate to you that itwill pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief,and an order that your company pay its court costs and attorney fees. Your company's liabilityand exposure under such legal action could be considerable.




Very truly yours,


^James F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: Mr. Dan Arment

Corporation Service Company - Boston, MAIllinois Corporation Service Co - Springfield, ILPrentice-Hall Corp. System - Jefferson City, MO

{DocNo. 02068061 }


Oak Park - Main Office25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650

Oak Park, Michigan 48237Tel.: (248) 968-5200Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park


November 16,2018

Grand Rapids625 Kenmoor Avenue, S.E,, Suite 304

Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546Tel.; (616) 949-5700Fax; (616)949-5704

Email; hewson(a)vanhewDc.com


7016 0340 0000 9022 6699

C T Corporation Systemc/o Registered Agent forSchutt Sports, Inc.4400 Easton Cmns, Suite 125Columbus, OH 43218-6230


Dear Sir or Madam:



The use of after-market products is not only allowed, but encouraged by the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, and your claims—made by your sales personnel and at various tradeshows—that the use of these afler-market products will violate your warranty is patently untrue.




{DocNo. 02068125 ) www.vanhewpc.com


wec VAN HELLEMONT, RC






Very truly yours,


les F, Hewson

i ̂JFH/mla

Cc: Mr. Robert Erb

CT Corporation System - Chicago, XL

{DocNo. 02068125 }


Oak Park — Main Office

25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650Oak Park, Michigan 48237Tel.: (248)968-5200Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park


November 16, 2018


Grand Rapids. Michigan 49546Tel.: (616) 949-5700

Fax: (616) 949-5704

Email: hewsonf« vanhcwpc.coni


7016 0340 0000 9038 9059

Illinois Corporation Service Coc/o Registered Agent forRiddell Incorporated801 Adlai Stevenson Drive

Springfield, IL 62703-4261

Re: Mayfield Athletics, S.A.F.E. Clip, and Zutl FacemasksFile No: 900.016449

Dear Sir or Madam:









wbVANHElUMOhfT.P.C

Mayfield Athletics, S.A.F.E. Clip, and Zutl FacemasksNovember 16, 2018Page 2




I recommend that you consult with an attomey regarding this matter. If you or yourattorney have any questions, please contact me directly.

Very truly yours,


hmes F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: Mr. Dan Arment

Corporation Service Company - Boston, MACorporation Service Company - Austin, TXPrentice-Hall Corp. System - Jefferson City, MO

{DocNo. 02068076}


Oak Park - Main OJfice25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650

Oak Park. Michigan 48237Tel.: (248) 968-5200

Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park


November 16, 2018



Fax:(616)949-5704

Email: hcwsonto vanhcwpc-coin


7016 0340 0000 9038 9028

Mr. Dan J. Arment

Chief Executive Officer

Riddell Incorporated9801 W. Higgins Road, Suite 800Rosemont, IL 60018-4706


Dear Mr. Arment:



The use of afler-market products is not only allowed, but encouraged by the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, and your claims—made by your sales personnel and at various tradeshows—that the use of these after-market products will violate your warranty is patently untrue.

Your company's misrepresentations regarding the use of these products constitutes anunlawful interference in the reasonable business expectancies of our client and must ceaseimmediately. Further, these misrepresentations are false and slanderous in unequivoeally statingthat the use of these products is illegal.





wtC VAN HELUMONT, PX.

Mayfield Athletics, S.A.F.E. Clip, and Zuti FacemasksNovember 16, 2018

Page 2





Very truly yours,

HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT, P.O.

es F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: Corporation Service Company - Boston, MACorporation Service Company - Austin, TXIllinois Corporation Service Co - Springfield, ILPrentice-Hall Corp. System - Jefferson City, MO

{DocNo. 02068038}


Oak Park - Main Office25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650Oak Park, Michigan 48237Tel.: (248) 968-5200Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park

iHf& VAN HELLEMONT, P.C.

November 16, 2018

Grand Rapids625 Kenmoor Avenue, S.E.. Suite 304


Fax: (616) 949-5704

Email: hew.sonto vanliL'wnc.com


7016 0340 0000 9022 6668

Prentice-Hall Corp. Systemc/o Registered Agent forRiddell Incorporated221 Bolivar Street

Jefferson City, MO 65101-1574


Dear Sir or Madam:

Please be advised that Hewson and Van Hellemont, P.C., has been retained by MayfieldAthletics to represent it in all matters, specifically including issues surrounding the S.A.F.E, Clipand Zuti Facemask.


The use of after-market products is not only allowed, but encouraged by the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, and your claims—^made by your sales personnel and at various tradeshows—that the use of these after-market products will violate your warranty is patently untrue.



If your company does not comply with this cease and desist demand within ten days,Mayfield Athletics is entitled to seek monetary damages and equitable relief based on yourmisrepresentations and your defamation. Furthennore, in the event that your company fails tocomply, please be advised that Mayfield Athletics has asked us to communicate to you that it



It VAN HEUEMCHfT.RC

Mayfield Athletics, S.A.F.E. Clip, and Zuti FacemasksNovember 16,2018Page 2




I recommend that you consult with an attomey regarding this matter. If you or yourattorney have any questions, please contact me directly.

Very truly yours,


es F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: Mr. Dan Arment

Corporation Service Company - Boston, MACorporation Service Company - Austin, TXIllinois Corporation Service Co - Springfield, IL

{DocNo. 02068111 }


Oak Park - Main OJfice25900 Greenfield Road, Suite 650Oak Park, Michigan 48237Tel.: (248) 968-5200

Fax: (248) 968-5270

Reply to: Oak Park


November 16, 2018


Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546Tel.: (616) 949-5700Fax: (616) 949-5704

Email: hcwsonCt) vanhcwnc.com


7016 0340 0000 9022 6675

Mr. Robert Erb

Chief Executive Officer

Schutt Sports, Inc.610 Industrial Drive South

Litchfield, IL 62056-3040


Dear Mr. Erb:

Please be advised that Hewson and Van Hellemont, P.O., has been retained by MayfieldAthletics to represent it in all matters, specifically including issues surrounding the S.A.F.E. Clipand Zuti Facemask.




Accordingly, we demand that your company (A) immediately cease and desist your false,misleading, and defamatory statements regarding S.A.F.E. Clip and Zuti Facemask; and, (B)provide us with prompt written assurance that you will cease and desist fi-om furthermisrepresentations and defamation of these products and of Mayfield Athletics.


{DocNo. 02068116 } WWW. vanhe wpc. com


wft VAN HEIXEMOOT, P£.






Very truly yours,

HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT, P.O.

es F. Hewson

JFH/mla

Cc: CT Corporation System - Chicago, ILCT Corporation System - Columbus, OH

{DocNo. 02068116}


united states district court eastern district ......2019/09/16 · 11. defendant kranos corporation...

Documents