FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 1 of 20 PUBLIC

Agency decision

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 1 of 20 *PUBLIC *

UNITED

UNITED STATES

STATES OF

OF AMERICA

AMERICA

BEFORE

BEFORE THE

THE FEDERAL

FEDERAL TRADE

TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSION

OFFICE

OFFICE OF

OF ADMINISTRATIVE

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

LAW JUDGES

JUDGES

FTC

FTC DOCKET

DOCKET NO.

NO. D09449

D09449

IN THE

THE MATTER

MATTER OF:

OF:

JASON

JASON SCOTT,

SCOTT, DVM

DVM

APPELLANT

THE

THE AUTHORITY’S

AUTHORITY’S RESPONSE

RESPONSE TO

TO APPELLANT’S

APPELLANT’S APPLICATION

APPLICATION FOR

FOR STAY

STAY

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 2 of 20 *PUBLIC *

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority, Inc, (Authority) hereby responds to the

Application For Stay filed by Appellant Jason Scott, DVM, on March 10, 2026.

As Appellant acknowledges, “the parties disagree on the merits.” See Stay Application 4.

In the Authority’s view, serious “violation[s] occurred” here under the Anti-Doping and

Medication Control (ADMC) Program Rules, id.: Appellant, a veterinarian registered as a Covered

Person under the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, was found in possession of two Banned

Substances, Sarapin (also known as Pitcher’s Plant) and Adenosine Monophosphate (AMP), at a

Covered Racetrack. As the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico held when rejecting

Appellant’s attempt to dodge these proceedings, “[p]ossession is the exact fact on which liability

depends”—and for which the ADMC Program Rules provide “thorough enforcement guidance,

specifying what classes banned substances fall into, the penalty points associated with each class,

and the fines/suspensions periods applicable.” Scott v. Horseracing Integrity & Safety Authority,

No. 2:25-cv-632, 2025 WL 2987598, at *7 (D.N.M. Oct. 22, 2025). While Appellant has been

provided opportunities to demonstrate a “compelling justification” as “an exception” to the

prohibition on his possession of the Banned Substances, id.; see ADMC Rule 3214(a), he has failed

to meet that standard, cf. ALJ Decision at 22-60, In re Dr. Larry Overly, DVM, Docket No. 9443

(ALJ FTC Jan. 27, 2026) (discussing and rejecting similar defense alleging drugs at issue were

applicable to veterinary practice involving horses not covered under the Act); ALJ Decision at 1435, In re Dr. Scott Shell, DVM, Docket No. 9439 (ALJ FTC Mar. 6, 2025) (similar). And

Appellant’s collateral “rulemaking and constitutional challenges” to the ADMC Program Rules

and their enforcement, see Stay Application 4, are meritless.

Although Appellant is liable for the Anti-Doping Rule Violations charged and proven and

should be subject to appropriate Consequences, the Authority does not oppose a stay of the

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 3 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Arbitrator’s decision in light of the rare circumstances in which it was issued. The Horseracing

Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) recently learned that the JAMS-assigned Arbitrator engaged

in ex parte communications initiated by Appellant’s counsel, in clear violation of ADMC Program

Rule 7150 and JAMS’s own restrictions. HIWU notified JAMS immediately upon discovering the

ex parte communication and provided a transcript and audio recording of the improper

conversation, which concerned this matter, other matters decided by or pending before the same

Arbitrator, and HIWU’s operation of the ADMC program generally. See Exhibit A. HIWU

requested that JAMS disqualify the arbitrator and vacate the decision. Id. Dr. Scott took “no

position on the motion.” See Exhibit B.

JAMS determined that it lacked authority to act on HIWU’s requests. See Exh. C. Even

though the Arbitrator’s decision was still subject to modification under Rule 7380—and though

the Authority had requested corrections to obvious errors under that Rule—JAMS took the view

that “[a] Final Decision in this matter was rendered” already. Id. Accordingly, pursuant to 15

U.S.C. § 3058(a) and Rule 7370, HIWU served notice of the Arbitrator’s decision, including the

sanctions imposed therein, on Appellant and the Commission.

The Arbitrator’s decision suffers from multiple and substantial defects. For one, it omits

any meaningful examination of whether Appellant proved that he had a compelling justification

for his possession of the Banned Substances—i.e., the central issue in this case. See Decision 3135 (“Analysis” section, which lacks any reference to “compelling justification”). For another, the

Arbitrator provided no explanation for limiting the period of Ineligibility (POI) to 18 months for

two violations or for ordering the POI to retroactively run from the date the Banned Substances

were discovered in Appellant’s possession—even though Appellant had not been suspended a

single day during that year-long period.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 4 of 20 *PUBLIC *

While

While the

the Authority

Authority is

is committed

committed to

to enforcing

enforcing lawful

lawful and

and appropriate

appropriate Consequences

Consequences for

for

the

the Rule

Rule violations

violations in

in this

this matter

matter at

at the

the appropriate

appropriate time,

time, the

the Authority

Authority is

is also

also dedicated

dedicated to

to ensuring

ensuring

that

that any

any sanctions

sanctions imposed

imposed under

under the

the ADMC

ADMC Program

Program are

are the

the product

product of

of aa disciplinary

disciplinary (and

(and

review)

process conducted

review) process

conducted with

with integrity.

integrity.

parte

In light

light of

of the

the Arbitrator’s

Arbitrator’s improper

improper ex

ex parte

communications

communications and

and the

the glaring

glaring flaws

flaws in

in the

the decision

decision he

he issued,

issued, the

the Authority

Authority does

does not

not oppose

oppose aa

stay

stay of

of that

that decision

decision pending

pending either:

either: (i)

(i) vacatur

vacatur of

of the

the Arbitrator’s

Arbitrator’s decision

decision and

and remand

remand for

for new

new

arbitration

proceedings before

arbitration proceedings

before aa new

new arbitrator,

arbitrator, 16

16 C.F.R.

C.F.R. §§ 1.146(d)(3)(i);

1.146(d)(3)(); or

or (ii)

(11) fulsome,

fulsome, de

de novo

novo

review

by the

review by

the ALJ,

ALJ, including

including “determination

“determination de

de novo”

novo” of

of whether

whether Appellant

Appellant is

is liable

liable for

for the

the AntiAntiDoping

Doping Rule

Rule Violations

Violations charged,

charged, id.

id. §§ 1.146(b).

1.146(b).

The

The Authority

Authority will

will provide

provide aa separate

separate response

response to

to Appellant’s

Appellant’s Application

Application For

For Review

Review by

the

the applicable

applicable deadline.

deadline.

RESPECTFULLY

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

SUBMITTED THIS

THIS 13th

13th day

day of

of March,

March, 2026.

2026.

/s/Bryan

H. Beauman

Beauman

/s/Bryan H.

BRYAN

BEAUMAN

BRYAN BEAUMAN

REBECCA

REBECCA PRICE

PRICE

333

Vine

333 W. Vine Street,

Street, Suite

Suite 1500

1500

Lexington,

Lexington, Kentucky

Kentucky 40507

40507

Telephone:

Telephone: (859)

(859) 255-8581

255-8581

bbeauman@sturgillturner.com

rprice@sturgillturner.com

HISA

HISA ENFORCEMENT

ENFORCEMENT COUNSEL

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 5 of 20 *PUBLIC *

CERTIFICATE

CERTIFICATE OF

OF SERVICE

SERVICE

Pursuant

Pursuant to

to 16

16 CFR

CFR §1.146(a)

§1.146(a) and

and 16

16 CFR

CFR §4.4(b),

§4.4(b), aa copy

copy of

of the

the Authority’s

Authority’s Response

Response is

being served

by emailing

being

served on

on March

March 13,

13, 2026,

2026, via

via Administrative

Administrative E-File

E-File System

System and

and by

emailing aa copy

copy to:

to:

Office

Administrative Law

Office of

of Administrative

Law Judges

Judges

Federal

Federal Trade

Trade Commission

Commission

600

Pennsylvania

600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Ave. NW

Washington

Washington DC

DC 20580

20580

via

via e-mail

e-mail to

to Oalj@ftc.gov

Oalj@ftc.gov

and

and electronicfilings@ftc.gov

electronicfilings@ftc.gov

Clark

Clark O.

O. Brewster

Brewster

Joseph

Joseph C.

C. De

De Angelis

Angelis

Brewster

Brewster &

& De

De Angelis,

Angelis, PLLC

PLLC

2617

2617 East

East 21st

21st Street

Street

Tulsa,

Tulsa, OK

OK 74114

74114

Phone:

Phone: (918)

(918) 742-2021

742-2021

Fax:

(918)

742-2197

Fax: (918) 742-2197

cbrewster@brewsterlaw.com,

jcdeangelis@brewsterlaw.com

Counsel

for Appellant

Appellant Dr.

Dr. Jason

Jason Scott

Counsel for

Scott

/s/ Bryan

Bryan Beauman

Beauman

/s/

Enforcement

Enforcement Counsel

Counsel

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 6 of 20 *PUBLIC *

EXHIBIT

February 19, 2026

Diana Tkaczuk

Case Manager

JAMS

160 W. Santa Clara Street, #1600

San Jose, CA 95113

DTkaczuk@jamsadr.com

Re:

HIWU vs. Scott, Dr. Jason/Reference #: 1501001099

Dear Ms. Tkaczuk:

This letter is to inform JAMS that the Horseracing Integrity & Welfare Unit (“HIWU”) has

just recently become aware of conduct during the hearing of the above-referenced matter that is

in clear violation of both the ADMC Program Rules and the JAMS Comprehensive Arbitration

Rules & Procedures, requiring disqualification of Arbitrator Hugh E. Hackney, Esq.

On November 20, 2025, on the second day of the hearing in this matter, Arbitrator

Hackney and Clark Brewster, Esq., one of Dr. Scott’s counsel, engaged in improper ex parte

communications when all of HIWU’s representatives were out of the room. HIWU discovered

this exchange when reviewing the audio of the hearing recorded by JAMS in order to determine

if HIWU was going to request modifications to the decision issued by Arbitrator Hackney under

ADMC Program Rule 7380. An unofficial transcript of the relevant portion of the audio is

attached, and the audio itself can be found here: Audio Clip from HIWU v. Dr. Scott. As those

materials make clear, the ex parte communications concerned this matter, other matters

decided by, or pending before, Arbitrator Hackney, and HIWU’s operation of the ADMC Program

generally.

This exchange is in violation of ADMC Program Rule 7150, which states that:

“Once appointed, no party and no Person acting on behalf of any party shall

communicate unilaterally concerning the case with any arbitrator or IAP member

appointed to hear the case. All communications with the Arbitral Body or Internal

Adjudication Panel or any arbitrator or IAP member concerning the case shall include

the other party or parties.”

In addition, JAMS Comprehensive Arbitration Rule 14(a) states that:

“No Party may have any ex parte communication with a neutral Arbitrator, except as

provided in section (b) of this Rule. The Arbitrator(s) may authorize any Party to

communicate directly with the Arbitrator(s) by email or other written means as long as

copies are simultaneously forwarded to the JAMS Case Manager and the other Parties.”

See also HISA’s Best Practices for the Arbitral Body 11(a).

Horseracing Integrity & Welfare Unit • 4801 Main Street, Suite 350 Kansas City, Missouri 64112-2749 • T 816 285 1425 • hiwu.org

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 7 of 20 *PUBLIC *

In fact, Arbitrator Hackney’s own Procedural Order, dated October 8, 2025, states that

“[t]he Parties shall not communicate with the Arbitrator directly and alone.” See Paragraph 6.

The June 16, 2025 letter from JAMS to the parties to this matter, which commenced the

arbitration and appointed Arbitrator Hackney, makes clear that the arbitration would be

conducted “in accordance with . . . HISA’s Best Practices for the Arbitral Body,” which were

attached to that letter. Best Practice 23(b) provides that “[i]f any Party becomes aware of

information that could be the basis of a challenge for cause to the continued service of the

Arbitrator, such challenge must be made promptly, in writing, to the Arbitrator or JAMS.”

Similarly, ADMC Program Rule 7140 provides that, a party may object to “the continued service

of an arbitrator,” and that the Arbitral Body “shall determine whether the arbitrator . . . is

evidently partial, and (if so) the arbitrator . . . shall be disqualified.” See also HISA’s Best

Practices for the Arbitral Body 8(c) (“Disputes concerning the appointment of the Arbitrator shall

be resolved by JAMS.”)

As a result, HIWU objects to Arbitrator Hackney’s service as the Arbitrator for this matter

and moves for his disqualification and the vacatur of the decision issued by him on Friday,

February 13, 2026. HIWU requests pursuant to ADMC Program Rules 7120 and 7140 that

JAMS resolve HIWU’s objections. HIWU will be providing under separate cover a request for

modifications to the issued decision pursuant to ADMC Program Rule 7380; however, this

request is not a waiver of HIWU’s right to contest the tenure of Arbitrator Hackney, and it is not

an acknowledgment or acceptance that the decision is the operative or final decision in this

matter. HIWU’s objection needs to be heard and decided in the first instance. Any final

corrected decision should be held in abeyance pending the resolution of HIWU’s objection to

Arbitrator Hackney’s qualification to preside over this Arbitration.

Please also be advised that, contrary to Mr. Brewster’s ex parte statements to Arbitrator

Hackney, I have not had any conversations with Mr. Brewster about Dr. Scott's case, nor has

HIWU's Executive Director, Ben Mosier.

Sincerely,

Michelle Pujals

HIWU General Counsel

Attachment (Unofficial Audio Transcript)

cc:

Samuel Reinhardt, HISA

John Pardun, JAMS

Lindsay A. Norman, JAMS

Clark Brewster, Counsel for Dr. Scott

Joey DeAngelis, Counsel for Dr. Scott

Hugh E. Hackney, Esq.

Allison J. Farrell, HIWU

Paul Greene, Counsel for HIWU

Ryan Lipes, Counsel for HIWU

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 8 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Selected

Selected Transcript

Transcript from

from Day

Day 2

2 of

of HIWU

HIWU v.

v. Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott

Starting

Starting at

at 5:42:31

5:42:31 of

of the

the audio

audio recording

recording to

to 5:58:59

5:58:59

Voices:

AaPpwhd >

1. Hugh

Arbitrator

Hugh Hackney,

Hackney, Arbitrator

2. Paul

Paul Greene,

Greene, Counsel

Counsel for

for HIWU

HIWU

3. Allison

for

Allison Farrell,

Farrell, Counsel

Counsel

for HIWU

HIWU

4. Clark

Clark Brewster,

Brewster, Counsel

Counsel for

for Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott

5. Joey

Joey DeAngelis,

DeAngelis, Counsel

Counsel for

for Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott

6. Tracy

Tracy Mosz,

Mosz, Paralegal

Paralegal for

for Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott

7. Dr.

Dr. Jason

Jason Scott,

Scott, Respondent

Respondent

8. Christine

Wife of

Christine Scott,

Scott, Wife

of Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott

[Cross-examination

[Cross-examination of

of Dr.

Dr. Scott]

Scott]

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

That’s

That’s all

alll I have.

have.

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

So,

just to

So, you're

you're saying

saying that

that there

there was

was an

an error

error 13

13 times,

times, just

to conﬁrm?

confirm?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

That's… you

That's...

you count

count it.

it.

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

Yeah, you

just conﬁrm.

Yeah,

you can

can look

look at

at it

it to

to just

confirm.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

I| don't

don't dispute

dispute that.

that.

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

Okay.

Okay. No

No further

further questions.

questions.

Arbitrator

you.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Okay.

Okay. Thank

Thank you.

Male

Male voice:

voice:

Is this

this ours?

ours?

Male

Male voice:

voice:

Yes.

Arbitrator

You want

want ﬁve

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: You

five minutes

minutes or

or something.

something. 10

10 minutes?

minutes?

Ms.

Ms. Farrell:

Farrell:

Can

Can we

we take

take 10

10 minutes

minutes

Arbitrator

Yeah sure

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Yeah

sure

Ms.

Ms. Farrell:

Farrell:

To talk

talk about

about if

if we

we can

can streamline

streamline this

this more.

more.

Mr.

Mr. DeAngelis:

DeAngelis:

We're talking

We're

talking rebuttal?

rebuttal?

Ms.

Ms. Farrell:

Farrell:

Yeah.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 9 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

We'll

We'll just

just talk.

talk.

Ms.

Ms. Farrell:

Farrell:

We'll

We'll just

just talk

talk amongst

amongst ourselves

ourselves for

for a

a minute.

minute.

Arbitrator

you have

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Do

Do you

have more

more than

than one

one witness?

witness? Okay.

Okay.

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

The only

The

only one

one would

would be

be if

if we…

we... if

if we…

we... if

if we

we call

call Dr.

Dr. Benson

Benson in

in rebuttal,

rebuttal,

that

that would

would be

be it.

it.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Arbitrator

Hackney: Okay.

Okay.

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

And…

And... and

and I| assume

assume you

you guys

guys don't

don't have

have any

any other

other witnesses

witnesses either,

either,

right?

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

We got

got our

our sur-rebuttal,

sur-rebuttal, we've

we've got

got 5

5 sur-rebuttal

sur-rebuttal witnesses.

witnesses.

Mr.

Mr. Greene:

Greene:

It's

you made

It's the

the ﬁrst

first time

time you

made me

me laugh,

laugh, Clark.

Clark. I| think

think we

we would

would like

like each

each

other

other if

if we

we hung

hung out.

out.

[HIWU

witness]

[HIWU attorneys

attorneys leave

leave the

the conference

conference room

room to

to discuss

discuss rebuttal

rebuttal witness]

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

How

you stay,

How busy

busy do

do you

stay, Judge?

Judge?

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Pardon?

Pardon?

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

How

you stay?

How busy

busy do

do you

stay? I| mean,

mean, do

do you

you do

do a

a lot

lot

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Me?

Me?

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

Yeah

Arbitrator

for

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: It

It depends.

depends. I'm

I'm pretty

pretty much

much aa full-time

full-time caregiver

caregiver

for my

my wife

wife now,

now, so

so I|

am…

am... I| pick

pick and

and choose.

choose. I've

I've got

got 4

4 of

of these

these cases

cases right

right now.

now. I've

I've got

got

one

one arbitration

arbitration in

in oil

oil and

and gas.

gas. I| thought

thought I'd

I'd do

do a

a lot

lot of

of mediation,

mediation, but

but

I'm

I'm not.

not.

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

How

How many

many HIWU

HIWU cases,

cases, though?

though?

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Four.

Four.

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

Does

virtue?

Does that

that mean

mean that

that we're

we're on

on the

the odd

odd man

man out

out here

here by

by virtue?

Arbitrator Hackney:

you're the

Arbitrator

Hackney: No,

No, you're

the ﬁrst

first one

one out

out of

of the

the gate.

gate.

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

No,

just want

No, but

but II just

want to

to make

make sure

sure that

that I'm

I'm not,

not, there's

there's not

not a

a stream

stream of

business

business that

that I'm

I'm ﬁghting

fighting against

against or

or something

something like

like that.

that.

Arbitrator

...

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: No,

No, look

look...

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 10 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

I| trust

trust not.

not.

Arbitrator

You know,

all this

this stuff

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: You

know, I…you

I...you know,

know, we

we had

had to

to ﬁll

fill out

out resumes

resumes and

and do

do all

stuff

about

about what

what we

we knew,

knew, and

and I| told

told them

them what

what I'd

I'd done.

done.

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

Have

Have you

you done

done some

some of

of these

these in

in the

the past?

past? Because

Because I| know

know you're

you're

familiar

familiar with

with them.

them.

Arbitrator

Yeah. Two

wrote an

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Yeah.

Two of

of them

them have

have settled,

settled, and

and I| wrote

an award

award in

in one

one of

of them,

them,

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

Which is?

Which

is?

Arbitrator

website, I'm

...

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: and

and it’s

it’s on

on the

the website,

I'm sure.

sure. And,

And, so

so...

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

We have

just have

we gotta

have no,

no, we

we have

have no

no vote

vote in

in the

the deal.

deal. We

We just

have to,

to, we

gotta ride

ride

the

the horse

horse we

we drew.

drew.

Arbitrator

The, you

you know,

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: The,

know, they're

they're still

still trying

trying to

to ﬁgure

figure out

out what

what they

they got

got in

in terms

terms of

rules.

rules. And

And I| probably

probably made

made a

a lot

lot of

of people

people mad

mad when

when I| made

made my

comments.

comments. But,

But, look,

look,

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

My deal

deal is,

is, I| like,

like, honestly,

honestly, this

this is

is off

off the

the subject,

subject, but

but my

my deal

deal is

is I'd

I'd like

we talk?

we resolve?

to reach

reach across

across the

the aisle

aisle and

and say,

say, can

can we

talk? Can

Can we

resolve? Just

Just

nothing.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Arbitrator

Hackney: No,

No, this

this is

is like

like dealing

dealing with

with a

a U.S.

U.S. Attorney.

Attorney.

Female

Female voice:

voice:

Yeah, right.

Yeah,

right.

Arbitrator Hackney:

That’s my

Arbitrator

Hackney: That’s

my equation.

equation.

Female

Female voice:

voice:

Yeah, exactly

Yeah,

exactly

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

And

And so

so my

my deal

dealisis

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: And

And they

they asked

asked for

for the

the death

death penalty

penalty in

in every

every case.

case.

Ms.

Ms. Mosz:

Mosz:

Yeah.

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

No,

No, I| like

like collaboration.

collaboration.

Ms.

Ms. Mosz:

Mosz:

Relish

Relish it,

it, relish

relish the

the death

death penalty.

penalty.

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

So we

we reached

reached out

out to

to the

the HIWU

HIWU executive

executive director,

director, we've

we've had

had a

number

number of

of conversations.

conversations.

Arbitrator Hackney:

You get

Arbitrator

Hackney: You

get nothing.

nothing.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 11 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Mr. Brewster:

Well, she's calling me, and she's like, she said, you're gonna win. I

mean, [don't] worry about it. And I'm like, I don't know.

Arbitrator Hackney: Who said that?

Mr. Brewster:

The executive director.

Arbitrator Hackney: Of HIWU?

Mr. Brewster:

Yes. She said, you don’t have to worry. I mean, how does she know,

but

Arbitrator Hackney: That damn sure isn’t the attitude I’ve ever heard out of ‘em.

Mr. Brewster:

Yeah, well, she's been calling. We've had, probably two conversations,

and then I'll probably call her tomorrow and speak about it. But . . .

Arbitrator Hackney: And by the way, I'm not ex parte-ing with you.

Mr. Brewster:

No, no. I'm just saying. I'm just saying

Arbitrator Hackney: This is all out there. You already know the answer to most of this. And

it…

Mr. Brewster:

I'm all for it. I was an advocate. The thing is, I like the centralization,

but the rules are, I mean, you're seeing it. Yeah, that's the problem.

Guys like this guy…

Arbitrator Hackney: And, and,

Mr. Brewster:

This is a good man.

Arbitrator Hackney: Well, I've asked everybody before on a call. What effect does the

Chevron case have on this?

Mr. Brewster:

Good point. Good point. I mean, we've [inaudible] that pretty much,

but…

Arbitrator Hackney: Because before Chevron, any one of the bureaucratic entities had the

right to write the rule, interpret the rule, enforce the rule. And now

that's not there anymore.

Mr. Brewster:

Yeah, I think it is there. It's just a matter of, I hope this isn't the one

where we have to prove it.

Arbitrator Hackney: Well, it's…

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 12 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

So…

So... It's

It's gotta

gotta be

be in

in Long…

Long... I| don't

don't know.

know.

Arbitrator

you ever

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Do

Do you

ever come

come over

over to

to Lone

Lone Star?

Star?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

It looks

looks like

like I| might

might be.

be.

[Laughter]

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Well,

Well, you

you know,

know, it

it was

was interesting

interesting because

because they

they really

really didn't

didn't even

even want

want

to have

have the

the arbitration

arbitration here

here because

because of

of Texas'

Texas' attitude

attitude toward

toward HIWU.

HIWU.

Male

Male Voice:

Voice:

Yeah.

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: And

And

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

I| very

very well,

well, I| very

very well

well may

may be

be relocating.

relocating.

Ms.

Ms. Mosz:

Mosz:

Well,

Well, you

you said

said you

you live

live in

in El

El Paso.

Paso.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

II do.

do.

Arbitrator

You know,

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Yeah,

Yeah, and

and it's

it's interesting,

interesting, you

you were

were talking

talking about,

about, You

know, I'm

I'm gonna

gonna

ask

you, but

wanted to,

ask you

you some

some questions

questions I| forgot

forgot to

to ask

ask you,

but I| wanted

to, and

and

I'm…I'm

want to

I'm...I'm gonna

gonna ask

ask them.

them. I've

I've got

got about

about 4

4 or

or 5

5 questions

questions I| want

to ask

ask

you.

you. And

And |I forgot

forgot to

to do

do it.

it. I| got

got carried

carried away

away with

with getting

getting done.

done.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

I| would

would appreciate

appreciate explaining

explaining anything

anything that

that I| can.

can.

Arbitrator

you were

Weatherford.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Okay.

Okay. The

The interesting

interesting thing

thing to

to me,

me, you

were talking

talking about

about Weatherford.

I| mean,

mean, that

that place

place is

is amazing

amazing when

when it

it comes

comes to

to horses.

horses. And

And of

of course,

course,

now

now Sheridan

Sheridan lives

lives there.

there.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

We drove

drove

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Taylor

Taylor Sheridan?

Sheridan?

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: He

He lives

lives in

in Weatherford.

Weatherford.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

We drove

drove right

right by.

by.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Is that

that where

where he

he ﬁlms?

films?

Arbitrator Hackney:

Worth, and

just bought

Arbitrator

Hackney: He

He ﬁlms

films right

right there

there on

on his

his ranch

ranch in

in Fort

Fort Worth,

and he

he just

bought the

the

Four

year for

Four Sixes

Sixes Ranch

Ranch last

last year

for $240

$240 million.

million. And

And he

he ﬁlms

films there

there now.

now.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

That's

That's where

where they,

they, they

they did

did the…

the...

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

They

They used

used that

that for

for the

the Yellowstone.

Yellowstone.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 13 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Yellowstone,

Yellowstone, as

as well

well as

as the

the 18…

18...

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

83?

yeah. Now

83? 1823?

1823? Whatever

Whatever it

it is,

is, yeah.

Now Landman,

Landman, yeah.

yeah.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

I| guess

guess Landman

Landman is

is in

in Midland,

Midland, right?

right?

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Landman

Landman is

is great.

great.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Yeah,

Yeah, | I like

like it.

it.

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: If

If you've

you've ever

ever worked

worked in

in the

the patch,

patch, that's

that's exactly

exactly the

the way

way it

it is.

is.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

One

jets, and

One of

of my,

my, best

best friends

friends ﬂies

flies private

private jets,

and when

when they

they were

were ﬁlming

filming

some

some of

of that

that at

at the

the Four

Four Sixes,

Sixes, he

he would

would ﬂy,

fly, oh,

oh, my

my brain's

brain's gone

gone dead.

dead.

Who’s

Who’s the

the singer

singer that’s

that’s in

in that

that

Ms.

Ms. Scott:

Scott:

Laney

Laney Olsen

Olsen (sp?)

(sp?)

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

No,

No, in

in the

the other

other one,

one, the

the 18.When

18.When they

they were…

were...

Ms.

Ms. Scott:

Scott:

Oh,

Oh, the

the lady.

lady.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Faith

Faith Hill

Hill and,

and, and

and Tim

Tim McGraw.

McGraw. Tim

Tim McGraw

McGraw and

and Faith

Faith Hill,

Hill, they

they could

could

ﬂy,

jet on

fly, they

they could

could land

land a

a Falcon

Falcon jet

on the

the Four

Four Six’s

Six’s private

private airstrip.

airstrip.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Wow,

Wow, that's

that's how

how big

big his

his strip

strip is!

is!

Arbitrator

Big range.

range.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Big

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Yeah.

Arbitrator

And aa lot

lot of

of ﬂat

flat land.

land.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: And

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Yeah,

jet right

Yeah, they

they could,

could, he

he could

could land

land the

the Falcon

Falcon jet

right on

on the…

the...

Arbitrator

Well, they

they had,

had, they

they had

had some

some of

of those

those cowboys

cowboys from

from the

the Four

Four Sixes

Sixes

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Well,

who died

in Yellowstone.

Yellowstone. And

And one

one of

of them

them was

was Buster

Buster Welch,

Welch, who

died not

not long

long

after

you know,

after his

his ﬁlm.

film. But,

But, I| mean,

mean, he's,

he's, you

know, in

in Texas,

Texas, he's

he's a

a legend.

legend.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Right.

Right. That

That Ori…Er,

Ori...Er, what's

what's his

his name,

name,

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

II can

can see

see him.

him.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

The white-haired

The

white-haired guy

guy that's

that's the

the cowboy

cowboy on

on the

the Yellowstone.

Yellowstone.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Sam

Sam Elliott?

Elliott?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

No.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 14 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Arbitrator

The guy

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: The

guy who

who played

played Jimmy?

Jimmy?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Not

The older

Not Jimmy.

Jimmy. The

older man.

man.

Arbitrator

yeah. The

The old

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Oh,

Oh, okay,

okay, yeah.

old guy.

guy.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

He's

He's around

around from

from New

New Mexico.

Mexico. He

He was

was a

a horse

horse hauler,

hauler, and

and would

would haul

haul

horses.

horses. Lori,

Lori, he

he all

all of

of aa sudden

sudden went

went from

from being

being a

a horse

horse hauler

hauler to…

to...

Arbitrator Hackney:

Arbitrator

Hackney: Movie

Movie star.

star.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Movie

yeah. I| bet

Movie star,

star, yeah.

bet he’s

he’s making

making a

a lot

lot more

more money

money now.

now.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

You still

You

still see

see him

him up

up in

in Rio

Rio Doso,

Doso, we've

we've seen

seen him

him a

a number

number of

of times

times

eating

eating breakfast

breakfast up

up at

at Alto

Alto Cafe.

Cafe.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Yeah, what

Yeah,

what do

do they

they say

say about

about barrel

barrel girls?

girls? Barrel…

Barrel... Buckle

Buckle bunnies.

bunnies.

Yeah, buckle

Yeah,

buckle buddies.

buddies. They're

They're bad

bad news.

news. Turn

Turn those

those men's

men's minds

minds to

mush,

mush, huh?

huh?

Arbitrator

I'm gonna

gonna step

step out

out and

and tell

tell them

them I| need

need to

to ask

ask some

some questions

questions that

that I|

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: I'm

forgot

forgot to.

to.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

We're talking

Taylor Sheridan.

We're

talking about

about Yellowstone

Yellowstone and

and Landman.

Landman. Taylor

Sheridan.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Billy

Billy Bob

Bob is

is fantastic

fantastic at

at that,

that, isn't

isn't he?

he?

Male

Male Voice:

Voice:

Yep.

Mr.

Mr. DeAngelis:

DeAngelis:

I'm

I'm gonna

gonna email

email you

you a

a PDF

PDF that

that I| need

need you

you to

to make.

make. Or

Or a

a PowerPoint

PowerPoint I|

need

need you

you to

to make

make into

into a

a PDF.

PDF.

Ms.

Ms. Mosz:

Mosz:

Oh,

Oh, ok.

ok. Is

Is that

that gonna

gonna be

be closing?

closing?

Mr.

Mr. DeAngelis:

DeAngelis:

But

But it's

it's not

not ready

ready yet.

yet.

Ms.

Ms. Mosz:

Mosz:

Oh.

Arbitrator

Taylor Sheridan

So, any…

any... I| mean,

mean, Taylor

Sheridan grew

grew up

up about

about 40

40 miles

miles northwest

northwest of

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: So,

where| I grew

where

grew up.

up. Little

Little bitty

bitty place

place called

called Cranﬁeld's

Cranfield's Gap.

Gap. And

And

everybody

everybody up

up there,

there, pretty

pretty much,

much, is

is Norwegian.

Norwegian.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Wow.

Arbitrator Hackney:

They all

And,

Arbitrator

Hackney: They

all came

came and

and settled

settled there

there and

and raised

raised sheep

sheep for

for the

the wool.

wool. And,

that's

that's where

where he

he grew

grew up.

up.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Wow.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 15 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Arbitrator Hackney: Then he moved to Fort Worth. I'm just amazed at how proliﬁc he is. I

guess he's been writing this stuff a long time. But,

Female Voice:

I just couldn't believe when we ﬁrst started watching Yellowstone, it's

like, okay, they're a problem? Shoot them, kill them, you know? That

was just so shocking.

Female Voice:

It's a great show, though.

Female Voice:

It was! I mean, I was addicted to it, yeah.

Arbitrator Hackney: You know, he's in the Cowboy Hall of Fame as a cutting horse rider,

Now, as a cutting horse trainer and he's about to be inducted as a

cowboy rider. So he will be in it 3 different times.

Female Voice:

He does all those segments, so…

Arbitrator Hackney: And most people, most people didn't realize…that he was the real

deal.

Female Voice:

Yeah. Well, he can create really, good women. But his women

characters are just as interesting as the men.

Arbitrator Hackney: When you are talking about, Weatherford, I mean, they've got cutting

horses in Weatherford that are valued at $8 million.

Female Voice:

One Horse?

Arbitrator Hackney: One horse

Female Voice:

What!

Arbitrator Hackney: And he's not a racehorse. But he can cut cattle. It's amazing. I used to

represent the King Ranch. And, they had a horse called Mr.

Sandheavy (sp?). And this was probably 20 years ago, and he was

valued in those days at 5, 6 million dollars. He's the number one stud

in the world. And, I was working down there, and… They took me out,

but…You know, I can't remember, but…The ranch manager was out

there on this horse, and he was cutting cattle out in the brush. I mean,

cactus, rattlesnakes, everything. I looked up, and I said, excuse me,

Mr. Claybird (sp?). Is that Mr. Sandheavy (sp?)? And he goes, yeah,

why'd you know? And I said I k now what he looks like. And he said

yeah. I said so that horse is out here working? He says we work all our

stock. I said, ok.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 16 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

I| hope

hope he

he was

was insured,

insured, right?

right? Insured

Insured that

that horse?

horse?

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

No,

No, they

they had

had too

too much

much money

money to

to insure.

insure.

Arbitrator

Amazing.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Amazing.

Female

Female Voice:

Voice:

Really?

[Questioning

[Questioning of

of Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott resumes]

resumes]

Arbitrator Hackney:

Yeah, okay.

Arbitrator

Hackney: Yeah,

okay. I| remind

remind you,

you, you're

you're under

under oath.

oath.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Yes, sir.

Yes,

Sir.

Arbitrator Hackney:

And I| have

You stated

Arbitrator

Hackney: And

have a

a couple

couple of

of questions.

questions. You

stated earlier

earlier that

that you

you were,

were, I|

believe,

believe, in

in the

the northwest

northwest corner

corner of

of the

the track

track the

the morning

morning of

of the

the

incident?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Yes, sir.

Yes,

sir.

Arbitrator

were actually

And you

you said

said you

you were

actually in

in the

the parked

parked in

in Texas,

Texas, is

is that

that correct?

correct?

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: And

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Yes

Arbitrator Hackney:

Alright, when

you were

you

when you

were stopped

stopped on

on the

the road

road going

going to

to Fronter,

Fronter, were

were you

Arbitrator

Hackney: Alright,

in Texas

Texas or

or New

New Mexico?

Mexico?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

In Texas.

Texas.

Arbitrator

you were

were

Okay. And

And you

were going…

going... now,

now, remind

remind me,

me, is…The

is...The place

place you

you were

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Okay.

going,

going, a

a workout

workout area?

area?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

It is,

is, it's

it's a

a training

training center.

center.

Arbitrator

Okay. Okay.

Okay.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Okay.

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

They have

They

have a

a track,

track, they

they get

get official

official works

works there.

there.

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Right,

Right, right.

right.

Mr.

Mr. DeAngelis:

DeAngelis:

you want

Do you

want us

us to

to put

put up

up the

the map?

map?

Mr.

Mr. Brewster:

Brewster:

We have

was in

have the

the map

map that

that shows

shows he

he was

in Texas.

Texas.

Arbitrator

where he

I've been

been there.

there. I| can

can visualize

visualize where

he was.

was. Anyway,

Anyway, that

that morning,

morning,

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: I've

when

you were

when you

you were

were stopped,

stopped, how

how many

many people

people were

were there

there when

when you

were

stopped?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

The three

The

three HIWU

HIWU investigators,

investigators, myself.

myself.

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 17 of 20 *PUBLIC *

Arbitrator

you communicate

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Okay.

Okay. Did

Did you

communicate with

with anyone

anyone other

other than

than the

the individual

individual

who testiﬁed

who

testified here?

here?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Which individual?

Well, I| communicated

with Dr.

Which

individual? Well,

communicated with

Dr. D’Alanzo.

D’Alanzo.

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Mr.

Mr. Bennett?

Bennett? Brian

Brian Bennett?

Bennett?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

I| didn't

didn't have

have any

any direct

direct questioning

questioning from

from the

the other

other investigators.

investigators. No,

No,

sir.

Sir.

Arbitrator

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Only

Only he?

he?

Dr.

Dr. Scott:

Scott:

Only

Only he.

he.

Arbitrator

Thank you.

you.

Arbitrator Hackney:

Hackney: Ok.

Ok. That’s

That’s it.

it. Thank

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 18 of 20 *PUBLIC *

JOSEPH C. DE ANGELIS

jcdeangelis@brewsterlaw.com

Phone 918-742-2021

Facsimile 918-742-2197

Law Offices of

Brewster & De Angelis

2617 East 21 st Street

Tulsa, OK 74114

EXHIBIT

February 23, 2026

Diana Tkaczuk

Case Manager

JAMS

160 W. Santa Clara Street, #1600

San Jose, CA 95113

DTkaczuk@jamsadr.com

Re:

HIWU vs. Scott, Dr. Jason/Reference #: 1501001099

Dear Ms. Tkaczuk,

Dr. Scott has no position on HIWU’s post-decision motion for disqualification, but he

offers the following context.

HIWU’s request for disqualification relies upon a brief political discussion in which all

parties were aware they were being recorded. This was not an “ex parte” discussion. The

conversation did not discuss a single issue of fact or law at the hearing. The bulk of the

conversation was focused on the show Yellowstone. Mr. Brewster referenced a call he had with

Lisa Lazarus and briefly lamented on the difficulty in reaching agreements with HIWU’s counsel,

which was no secret. Mr. Hackney further stated (correctly) that he was not “ex parte-ing.”

HIWU omits that Arbitrator Hackney conversed alone with each side on repeated occasions

during the multi-day hearing. We personally observed and interrupted several conversations

“alone” with HIWU’s attorneys and witnesses (including Dionne Benson) virtually each day

before the hearing began, on most breaks, and after the conclusion of the hearing. When we entered

the room, the topics of conversation often included “HIWU’s operations.”

That is not to say that Mr. Hackney was behaving improperly. To the contrary, it was

obvious (to us, at least) that his purpose in engaging with attorneys and witnesses was to get to

know the people appearing before him and to encourage compromise. He openly condemned

gamesmanship, frankly criticized HIWU’s rules, and was transparent that he believed this case

should be settled, which all are sentiments he conveyed on the record.

Whatever the context, HIWU must show bias to secure recusal. Bias is never presumed, so

HIWU must show that the communication so prejudicially influenced Mr. Hackney that he was

incapable of rendering a decision impartially. HIWU fails to meet its heavy burden and, indeed,

never attempts to do so. HIWU never argues, for example, that any finding of fact was against the

weight of evidence or that any conclusion of law was found against them. The arbitrator’s award

did nothing more than acknowledge that the underlying facts were undisputed and then found that

those facts warranted a violation and penalty, which is exactly what HIWU argued should be the

outcome. That penalty is effectively six months (after the probated portion). That penalty was

double what Dr. Scott argued should be the maximum. The New Mexico Racing Commission

intends to reciprocate the penalty, so HIWU’s suspension effectively bars Dr. Scott’s non-covered

www.brewsterlaw.com

*CLARK O. BREWSTER  JENNIFER L. DE ANGELIS  GUY A. FORTNEY

MONTGOMERY L. LAIR  CORBIN C. BREWSTER  KATIE A. MCDANIEL  **JOSEPH C. DE ANGELIS

*Licensed in Oklahoma and Texas

**Licensed in Oklahoma and Colorado

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 19 of 20 *PUBLIC *

practice in

practice. As

be forced

practice

in addition

addition to

to his

his covered

covered practice.

As aa result,

result, Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott will

will be

forced to

to hand

hand over

over all

all

his

non-covered horses

his accounts

accounts for

for covered

covered and

and non-covered

horses to

to his

his direct

direct competitors,

competitors, resulting

resulting inevitably

inevitably in

aa permanent

permanent loss

loss of

of customers

customers and

and clients.

clients. HIWU

HIWU won

won on

on every

every measure.

measure.

was not

prohibited communication,

possibly

In short,

short, the

the brief

brief communication

communication was

not aa prohibited

communication, could

could not

not possibly

have

have biased

biased Mr.

Mr. Hackney

Hackney against

against HIWU,

HIWU, and

and clearly

clearly did

did not

not do

do so.

so. Dr.

Dr. Scott

Scott questions

questions HIWU’s

HIWU’s

motives

motives in

in bringing

bringing such

such aa specious

specious motion

motion to

to set

set aside

aside aa decision

decision in

in its

its favor.

favor. Regardless,

Regardless, Dr.

Dr.

Scott

takes

position

the

motion,

however

thin

may

be.

Scott takes no position on the motion, however thin it may be.

Respectfully,

/s/ Joseph

Joseph C.

DeAngelis

/s/

C. DeAngelis

Joseph

Joseph C.

C. DeAngelis

DeAngelis

Attorney for

Attorney

for Dr.

Dr. Scott

PUBLIC

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 03/13/2026 OSCAR NO. 615029 -PAGE Page 20 of 20 *PUBLIC *

EXHIBIT

NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES

RE:

February 27, 2026

HIWU vs Scott, Dr. Jason – 1501001099

Dear Parties:

The Arbitral Body, JAMS, has received and reviewed Claimant's request to disqualify the

arbitrator and to vacate the Final Decision, and Respondent's related correspondence thereto.

Rule 7140 provides:

Upon objection of a party to the continued service of an arbitrator or IAP member, the Arbitral

Body or Internal Adjudication Panel (as applicable) shall determine whether the arbitrator or

IAP member is evidently partial, and (if so) the arbitrator or IAP member shall be disqualified.

The Arbitrator Body or Internal Adjudication Panel shall inform the parties of its decision, which

shall be final and not subject to review or any other challenge.

Best Practice 12(c) provides that if an arbitrator for any reason is unable to fulfill their duties

after the beginning of a hearing but before the issuance of a Final Decision, a new arbitrator will

be chosen in accordance with this best practice.

A Final Decision in this matter was rendered on February 12, 2026.

JAMS, as the Arbitral Body, has not been provided with any authority by Claimant that would

allow the Arbitral Body to review a request to disqualify an arbitrator after a Final Decision has

been rendered or any authority that allows the Arbitral Body to vacate the arbitrator's final

decision. Pursuant to Best Practice 22, proceedings to enforce, confirm, modify, or vacate the

Final Decision will be controlled by and conducted in conformity with the Horseracing Integrity

and Safety Act of 2020, as amended.

Sincerely,

Arbitral Body, JAMS

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.