Back in March 2024, District Court Judge Henry L. Adams sentenced former Jacksonville Jaguars manager of financial planning and analysis Amit Patel to six years and six months in prison for wire fraud and engaging in an illegal monetary transaction. Now, more than two years later, the legal battle connected to Patel is heading out of court.

Per reports, U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted FanDuel’s motion to pause Patel’s lawsuit pending arbitration last week. That means the dispute will now be handled privately through arbitration rather than traditional court proceedings, with the process overseen by an arbitrator. The judge reached that decision after determining that Patel had agreed to FanDuel’s terms of use, which included clear warnings written in all caps stating that users were waiving their right to sue in court, such as:

“IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO BINDING ARBITRATION AND A WAIVER OF CLASS ACTION RIGHTS” and “PLEASE READ THIS SECTION CAREFULLY – IT MAY SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING YOUR RIGHT TO FILE A LAWSUIT IN COURT.”

The development comes years after Patel sued FanDuel for allegedly worsening his gambling addiction by luring him with betting credits and gifts. While with the Jaguars, Patel managed the franchise’s virtual credit card program, giving him oversight of vendor payments and purchase orders.

Prosecutors stated that Patel abused that position by making fraudulent transactions and then covering them up through false accounting entries designed to mislead the organization’s finance department.

Authorities also said Patel’s scheme involved duplicating charges tied to airfare, catering, and hotel expenses while inflating legitimate transaction amounts to funnel more money out of the organization.

The stolen funds were later spent on luxury purchases that included a condo, vehicles such as a Tesla and a pickup truck, sports memorabilia, and other high-end items. At the same time, though, a significant portion of the money was also tied to gambling activity.

That is where FanDuel entered the picture. According to reports, Patel allegedly wagered more than $20 million on the betting platform between 2019 and 2023. The lawsuit further claimed that he made roughly 1,077 separate deposits into his FanDuel account, with each transaction averaging around $25,000.

And while he eventually pleaded guilty to the crimes, he later filed a $250 million lawsuit against FanDuel. In the lawsuit, Patel alleged that the betting platform recognized signs of his gambling addiction and suspicious betting activity. However, instead of stepping in or investigating further, they continued encouraging him to gamble.

According to Patel, FanDuel treated him as a VIP customer because of the amount of money he was wagering. He claimed the company provided him with nearly $1.1 million in betting credits, luxury trips, invitations to events like the Masters and the Super Bowl, along with constant contact from VIP representatives.

In simpler terms, Patel’s lawsuit argued that FanDuel was doing more than just operating a sportsbook. He alleged the company knowingly benefited from his addiction and continued fueling destructive behavior because he remained a highly profitable customer.

But now, Patel can no longer continue the legal battle in open court because of the terms of use he allegedly agreed to while using FanDuel. Even so, Patel’s legal team continued pushing back against the case being moved into arbitration.

Judge Broderick rejected Amit Patel’s “infinite arbitration” argument

For FanDuel, the lawsuit filed by Amit Patel heading into arbitration is an important development in the ongoing legal drama. Because even if they eventually win the case, public lawsuits can still damage their reputations. However, Patel tried to fight against arbitration. His legal team argued that FanDuel’s arbitration clause was overly broad. They described it as “infinite arbitration,” meaning the company was attempting to push virtually any dispute into private arbitration, even matters not directly tied to the agreement itself.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick, however, rejected that argument. Broderick stated that Patel’s claims were directly connected to FanDuel’s terms of use because the lawsuit centered around how Patel used the platform as a consumer to gamble on the company’s website. The judge added that “there is no mismatch” between the lawsuit and the arbitration agreement.

That does not mean Patel has either won or lost the case. He will still have to prove his allegations through arbitration proceedings. Whether he can successfully do that remains unclear. What is certain, though, is that Patel’s legal battle against FanDuel will now move forward privately under the confidentiality of arbitration rather than inside a public courtroom.