COLUMBUS, Ohio (WOWO) — Former Ohio State University President Ted Carter has responded to a lawsuit connected to his relationship with podcaster Krisanthe Vlachos, denying allegations against him and asking a judge to dismiss the case.

The filing, made through Carter’s attorney Austin Richards on Aug. 19, marks the first time Carter has publicly addressed the allegations since his abrupt departure from Ohio State five months ago.

The lawsuit was filed in June by Paul Hylenski, a disabled veteran and founder and CEO of Vet Mentor AI, a technology company developing applications designed to help veterans transition to civilian life.

Hylenski sued Carter, Vlachos, JobsOhio and VetEarn USA, a company associated with Vlachos, alleging defamation and what he described as “intentional interference of business relationship.”

The dispute centers in part on a veterans-focused app that Hylenski developed and presented to Ohio State and JobsOhio officials.

An Ohio State investigation previously concluded that Carter had improperly used his position at the university to benefit Vlachos, with whom he was romantically involved. According to the investigation, Carter helped connect Vlachos with investors and others in connection with an app concept intended to connect veterans with resources.

Records included in Ohio State’s investigation contained statements from university and JobsOhio employees describing the app as “not viable” and indicating that stakeholders had decided not to move forward with it.

Hylenski disputes that characterization.

He alleges the statements damaged his reputation and business and argues that communications surrounding the project showed that Ohio State and JobsOhio remained interested in pursuing the concept.

Hylenski presented the app to Ohio State and JobsOhio leaders on Dec. 10. According to his lawsuit, officials followed up on Dec. 20 requesting another meeting “sooner than later.”

“Any rational person would walk away from that saying, ‘We have this, we’re going to do this,'” Hylenski said. “And that’s how we walked away from that meeting.”

Carter’s response rejects Hylenski’s claims. Through Richards, Carter denied the allegations outright when possible and said in other instances that he lacked sufficient information to provide a definitive response.

Carter and JobsOhio are also asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit according to WCMH.

Their attorneys argue, among other things, that Hylenski waited too long to bring some of his claims and has not established the existence of a legally enforceable contract that would support his allegations.

Richards additionally argued that Carter should receive damages because of what he characterized as the “frivolous nature” of the lawsuit.

JobsOhio filed its own response this month, denying the allegations or stating that it lacked enough information to admit or deny certain claims. Its attorney, Marc Kessler, argued that Hylenski had not established a legal basis for obtaining relief and that JobsOhio did not owe him a legal obligation.

Vlachos, meanwhile, has not filed a response in the case. She has returned to activity on some social media platforms.

The litigation is separate from another lawsuit filed by Hylenski’s company, Vet Mentor AI, against Ohio State and Carter in the Ohio Court of Claims.

In that case, Hylenski’s company alleges that Ohio State and Carter caused people involved in the project to break commitments made to Hylenski.

The company also alleges that Ohio State made defamatory statements about Hylenski and claims the university was negligent in its hiring of Carter.

The Court of Claims case also raises questions about Carter’s legal status at the time of the events, including whether he was acting as an agent of Ohio State or in a personal capacity.

Ohio Attorney General Andrew Wilson filed a response on behalf of Ohio State on Aug. 18.

Wilson asked the court to treat Carter and Ohio State as separate legal entities and also asked the court to determine that Carter does not have immunity from the claims simply because he was a state employee.

The question of immunity could have significant implications for how the case proceeds.

Ohio State has said it will rely on its court filings rather than provide additional comment on the litigation. JobsOhio likewise declined to comment on pending matters.

Carter’s response comes months after his departure from Ohio State following the university’s investigation into his conduct involving Vlachos.

The university’s investigation found that Carter had misused his position to benefit Vlachos, including by using university connections in support of her professional interests.

The lawsuit brought by Hylenski focuses on the fallout surrounding the veterans app and whether statements made by Carter, Ohio State or other defendants harmed Hylenski’s business and reputation.

The defendants have denied the allegations, and the court has not ruled on the merits of Hylenski’s claims.

The Ohio Court of Claims is scheduled to hold a telephone conference Sept. 14 to address Carter’s immunity and the related litigation involving Carter, Vlachos and JobsOhio.

The proceedings are ongoing, and the allegations contained in the lawsuits have not been established as facts in court.