Go toward the bottom.
Summary -- 1) arbitrator is entitled to great deference; 2) court cannot reevaluate the findings of fact; 3) there is no such thing as "law of the shop"; 4) Brady did it, or at least there was enough evidence for Goodell to find that Brady did it.
The most interesting thing about the brief:
-- Brady's destruction of his cell phone was not known to the Wells Report folks, but instead the Union presented that piece of information in pursuing the appeal. (Ooops).
-- Brady was asked for all texts or emails about the deflation of footballs at any time to anyone. That is why he didn't want to produce the phone -- he was texting someone ELSE about football deflation.
-- Brady could not produce his phone since it was his standard practice to destroy his phones -- except he still had the phone from BEFORE the destroyed one. Again, oops. "Well, it is my standard practice.....this one time."
The union has argued "evident partiality" by Goodell. Yeah, sure.