Final Issued Decision – Dallas Jennings – Anti-Doping Rule Violation

This document explains the disciplinary proceedings under IMMAF’s Anti-Doping Rules concerning an Anti-Doping Rule Violation committed by Mr Dallas Jennings and sets out consequences applied.

Background and Facts

1. IMMAF is the International Federation for Mixed Martial Arts. The IMMAF Anti-Doping Policy applies to all members and competitions, activities organised, convened, authorised or recognised by IMMAF.

2. Mr Dallas Jennings participated in the Men’s Middleweight category of the IMMAF World Championships 2016 held in Las Vegas USA. Following the final bout on 10th July 2016, a no- notice in-competition doping control test carried out on Mr Jennings, was analysed at a World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) accredited laboratory (UCLA), in accordance with the procedures set out in the WADA International Standard for Laboratories. The analysis revealed adverse findings for the presence of the following Prohibited Substances :

a. S1 Anabolic Agents, 1. Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) a. Exogenous AAS:
epitrenbolone, metabolite of trenbolone,
b. Boldenone and boldenone metabolite at concentrations of 1445 and 980 ng/mL, respectively. Specimen specific gravity is 1.019,
c. S4 Hormone and Metabolic Modulators: anastrozole,
d. S4 Hormone and Metabolic Modulators: 1,4,6-androstratriene-3,17-dione (ATD). in addition:
e. Atypical Findings: Urine specimen has a T/E ratio of 46. The threshold T/E ratio is 4.0. The specimen also has an elevated concentration of endogenous steroid (Testosterone > 200 ng/mL)

3. Mr Jennings does not have, nor has he ever held, a Therapeutic Use Exemption in respect of these substances.

4. On 10th August 2016, IMMAF issued a ‘Notification of an Adverse Analytical Finding’, relating to the commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation pursuant to Article 2.1 of IMMAF’s Anti- Doping Rules (Presence of Prohibited Substances). The Notification explained the facts concluding the adverse findings in the A Sample, procedures for analysis of the B Sample should these findings be disputed and consequences for admission or confirmation of an ADRV. Mr Jennings was provisionally suspended from all competition from 10th August 2016.

5. Mr Jennings accepted the result of his A Sample finding and waived the B Sample analysis, thus admitting the commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation. This decision records the Consequences to be applied in respect of that violation.

Anti-Doping Rules, Admission and Consequences

6. Mr Jennings has admitted committing a violation pursuant to Article 2.1 which provides that the Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample constitutes a violation.

7. Mr Jennings has not offered any explanation that could be construed to dispute the conclusion the presence of the above substance is an intentional act. Therefore Mr Jennings is not entitled to any reduction of sanction pursuant to Article 10.4 (No Significant Fault or Negligence). A period of ineligibility of four years must therefore be imposed on Mr Jennings.

8. Article 10.6.3 provides that Mr Jennings ‘may receive a reduction in the period of Ineligibility down to a minimum of two years’ if he has made a prompt admission; any reduction depends on “the seriousness of the violation and Mr Jennings’ ‘degree of Fault’. Mr Jennings made a prompt admission of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation and acceded to the consequences specified by IMMAF (or is deemed to have done so in accordance with Article 7.10), waiving B Sample Analysis and accepting the result of his A Sample. However IMMAF has considered the seriousness of the violation and Mr Jennings’ level of fault in the circumstances and takes the view that testing positive for four Prohibited Substances, two Androgenic Anabolic Agents and two Hormone and Metabolic Modulators, in addition an atypical finding of a T/E ratio of 46, (the threshold T/E ratio is 4.0) is a serious offence involving a significant level of fault which Mr Jennings has not disputed, therefore IMMAF has no grounds to exercise its discretion to reduce the period of ineligibility. Consequently the period of ineligibility from competitions, activities organised, convened, authorised or recognised by IMMAF, its member organisations, imposed must remain four (4) years.

9. Results obtained at the 2016 World Championships are disqualified, including forfeiture of all medals, points and prizes. Mr Jennings membership of IMMAF and its national member organisations is suspended for the period of this sanction and this ineligibility to compete shall be recognised by other sports and organisations applying mutual recognition. Mr Jennings has been subject to a Provisional Suspension since the date of the Notification; in accordance with Article 10.11.12, his suspension shall commence from the date of sample collection (10 July 2016) through to midnight on 09 July 2020. During this period of ineligibility, Mr Jennings shall remain subject to testing, as a condition of eligibility to return to the sport. He may return to train with a team or use the facilities of a club or other member organisation during the last two months of the period of ineligibility.

10. Mr Jennings, MMAF United States and WADA have not exercised a right of appeal against this determination or any part of it, in accordance with Article 13, to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. This is now final. A full statement of the issued decision shall be published on IMMAF’s website and notified to relevant parties, as required by Article 14.3.

11. Summary: IMMAF has issued this decision which records that
• Mr Jennings has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation pursuant to Article 2.1
• The period of ineligibility imposed is four years, commencing the date of sample collection to 09 July 2020
• Results obtained at the 2016 World Championship are disqualified.
• No appeal has been filed against this decision

Densign White

Chief Executive

International Mixed Martial Arts Federation 1st January 2017