Two months before an alleged hit-and-run turned his world upside down, Jon Jones threatened to sue the Nevada State Athletic Commission for violating his privacy, according to a letter the now-former UFC light heavyweight champion sent to the commission via his legal rep.

Las Vegas-based attorney Ross Goodman, writing on behalf of Jones, claimed the NSAC went beyond its authority when it released the results of an out-of-competition drug test for UFC 182, according to the letter, obtained via public records request by MMAjunkie and viewable here.

“We are actively considering civil claims against the NSAC, and its board members, for invasion of Mr. Jones’ privacy, based on the NSAC’s admitted mishandling of Mr. Jones’ out-of-competition drug testing,” wrote Goodman.

Jones, 27, headlined UFC 182 on Jan. 3 at Las Vegas’ MGM Grand Garden Arena and earned his eighth title defense in a unanimous decision over Daniel Cormier. He was twice tested out-of-competition as well as on fight night by the overseeing Nevada State Athletic Commission.

A test conducted Dec. 4 came back positive for cocaine metabolites, but the NSAC did not discipline Jones since the drug is not banned out-of-competition, or more than 12 hours from an event. The commission later called its decision to test for street drugs an “administrative oversight.” The UFC ultimately fined Jones $25,000 for violating its code of conduct.

Goodman argued the NSAC shouldn’t have released the results of Jones’ failed test or “other confidential medical information” on the fighter’s “T levels” to the media because they did not represent doping violations. (MMAjunkie was among several outlets that made a public records request for Jones’ drug test results.)

“The wrongful dissemination of such medical information further invaded Mr. Jones’ privacy triggering additional attacks on his professional reputation,” Goodman wrote.

The attorney claimed the commission not only violated the World Anti-Doping Agency’s code, which allows for disclosure only in the case of a positive, but also Nevada law by releasing information not related to Jones’ licensing as a fighter.

As a result, he argued, the commission caused “permanent and irreparable reputational harm along with a $25,000 fine imposed by the UFC.”

Goodman gave the NSAC two weeks to turn over paperwork related to the testing as well as the names of anyone to whom the information was leaked. He asked the commission to justify its decision to release the information and questioned the authority used to test Jones, who was not licensed at the time of his Dec. 4 test.

(Goodman also is representing Wanderlei Silva in court against the NSAC on the claim the commission overstepped its bounds when it tested him as an unlicensed fighter and issued a lifetime ban for evading an out-of-competition test. Silva previously criticized the NSAC’s handling of the Jones case.)

The NSAC did not cooperate with Goodman’s requests. In a letter dated Feb. 13 – the last day to respond – the state’s attorney general, Adam Laxalt, dismissed the attorney’s claims.

Laxalt argued the NSAC has “broad powers” to protect the health and safety of unarmed combatants and said they could be tested at any time by order of the commission. He pointed out that the NSAC is not, in fact, a signatory to the WADA code and is thus not bound by its rules on disclosure. Rather, the commission is bound by state laws that permit information pertaining to a license to be made public.

Further, he wrote, “the commission did not disclose the Dec. 4 test results to the media; the UFC did.”

“When a fighter requests license from the commission, they are placing at issue their character, integrity, and ability to participate in a contest of unarmed combat,” Laxalt wrote. “Many factors can influence a fighter’s character, integrity, and ability to participate.

“Mr. Jones’ test showed that he had been using cocaine, which violated the laws of Nevada. Cocaine is an illegal drug and Mr. Jones’ use of cocaine is something that is and may be considered in the licensing process. Such activity in or out of competition brings discredit to the sport of unarmed combat.”

It’s unclear whether Jones’ complaints went any further than Goodman’s initial letter. Goodman declined to comment on the matter beyond acknowledging he had represented Jones in Nevada.

With Jones now at the center of an alleged hit-and-run accident, his attention has shifted to defending himself against potential criminal charges. A district attorney’s office has 60 days to decide whether or not to proceed with the case.

Jones only public comment on the matter came in March, when he said he had hired an attorney to look into how the commission handled his test.

“We haven’t quite completely let it go,” Jones said. “We wanna see what went wrong and what could be done about it. I’m not gonna comment too much on that whole situation, but I am aware that there was some foul play in the whole situation, and right now I’m kinda weighing my options.”

For more on UFC 187, check out the UFC Rumors section of the site.