ccording to a federal judge, Ivey's actions did not constitute civil fraud. However, the same judge claimed that the actions of the poker legend and his partner had violated state regulations of what constitutes a fair game between the player and the casino.
Then it was ruled that Ivey's attempt to move forward to the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals would have to wait for resolution of a separate lawsuit by Borgata against Gemaco, the playing card manufacturer.
In the latest twist in the Ivey versus Borgata battle, the casino now wants to force Gemaco to pay the $ 10M that it lost.
The filing notes the indisputable fact that the cards were "marked". Borgata further points out that Gemaco well aknowledged this and decided to sell them to Borgata anyway.
If Borgata wins the battle against Gemaco, will the judge order the card manufacturer to pay the casino $10.1m? What does it mean for Ivey?