Comcast pushed back on Altitude Sports’ lawsuit against the cable giant for alleged violations of federal antitrust laws, filing motions late Tuesday to dismiss the case and a stay for discovery to delay disclosing evidence.

Altitude, blacked-out from Comcast since August in stalled negotiations for carriage rights, filed its lawsuit in November. It claimed Comcast “wants to extinguish competition from Altitude” by cutting its financial commitment by up to 50%, and dropping Altitude subscribers to a more expensive “sports tier” package that reaches fewer subscribers. Altitude alleges Comcast aims to eventually “monopolize” sports programming in Denver with its own regional sports network.

Comcast responded Tuesday with a pair of court filings aimed at discrediting Altitude’s lawsuit. They also argued that the independent regional sports network’s aggressive discovery requests — 25 fact witnesses and 55 documents per side — are an effort to leverage carriage rights negotiations moving forward.

“Instead of negotiating with Comcast in good faith to reach a mutually acceptable deal, Altitude filed meritless legal claims in an attempt to force Comcast to pay more than Altitude’s content is worth,” Comcast spokeswoman Leslie Oliver said in a statement to The Denver Post. “We think it’s unfair to our customers who do not want to watch the games to overpay to subsidize a network that has numerous distribution options in addition to Comcast, such as other video service providers, online video channels, and directly to consumers.”

Altitude issued a statement to The Denver Post later Wednesday.

“Comcast’s poor attempt to avoid this lawsuit was as predictable as it is futile. The complaint clearly states Comcast is illegally using monopoly power to harm consumers and drive Altitude from the market, and we look forward to proving that in court.”

Comcast’s motion to dismiss relies on several arguments:

• It equates Altitude’s antitrust claims, at most, as a “lawful unilateral refusal to deal” due to Comcast’s “legitimate business objective of achieving cost savings.” Previously unreported, Comcast stated that it offered Altitude the following carriage rights contract: Three years, no minimum distribution requirements, at a flat monthly fee (instead of a per-subscriber fee), and annual increases. Altitude declined, refusing to accept terms that would’ve placed its content on a tier package.

• Comcast claims it is unable to monopolize sports viewership in the Denver designated market area (70 counties between Colorado, Nebraska and Wyoming) with a reported 57% market share, as noted in the antitrust lawsuit. Comcast’s motion to dismiss lists legal precedent as 70% to 80% to define monopoly power.

• Comcast does not consider itself a competitor in the Denver sports rights market, but rather a customer of Altitude, and argues the antitrust allegations against it do not show that Comcast plans to operate a Denver RSN or harm competition. Furthermore, Comcast cites legal precedent in its motion to dismiss.

“Because Comcast and Altitude occupy different market levels in the chain of distribution of programming, Comcast cannot have ‘denied an essential facility to a competitor.’”

Comcast also states it is “implausible” that Altitude owner Stan Kroenke would facilitate Comcast’s launching of a regional sports network.

Comcast’s motion to stay discovery — a delay for producing requested evidence — alleges that Altitude plans to use the process to improperly “gain bargaining leverage” to achieve a “more favorable deal than it was able to reach through commercial negotiations.” Comcast said that Altitude’s request for 25 fact witnesses and 55 documents per side is “more than double the presumptive limit.”

Altitude has not broadcast Nuggets or Avalanche games on Comcast or DISH Network since their contracts expired at the end of August. However, Altitude reached a multiyear agreement with DirecTV on Oct. 31 to resume sports programming.