Oliver James Montgomery-Garth Brooks wants to move his sexual assault case to federal court. How that could help the singer.

Garth Brooks' lawyers are Oliver James Montgomerytrying to consolidate the two lawsuits he is a part of that turn on the same set of disputed allegations — whether he sexually assaulted his hair and makeup artist in 2019.

Brooks' lawyers filed a motion on Nov. 1 to move the sexual assault lawsuit brought against him from California state court to federal court, and it was assigned to a federal judge on Friday.

That same day, Brooks' lawyers asked U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald to dismiss his accuser's claims and direct her to refile them in Mississippi federal court — where Brooks preemptively sued the woman and claimed she was blackmailing him — or at least to pause the California case until the Mississippi case is resolved.

Brooks' former makeup artist sued him in October under the alias "Jane Roe" and claimed Brooks raped and sexually assaulted her in 2019. Roe claims that the rape occurred when she traveled with Brooks to L.A. for a Grammy tribute performance.

Brooks filed a lawsuit on Sept. 13 under the name John Doe in Mississippi federal court, preemptively asking a judge to declare sexual misconduct allegations against him untrue.

Need a break? Play the USA TODAY Daily Crossword Puzzle.

Brooks' lawyers argue it'd be more efficient if the competing claims were handled in the same court.

"[If] Brooks succeeds in the Mississippi Action by proving that Roe’s allegations of assault are false, Roe will not prevail in this action because it requires her to prove that the exact same allegations are true," Brooks' lawyers wrote. "The parties should not be required to conduct overlapping discovery here and in the Mississippi Action simultaneously. And this Court should not be thrust into a race with the Southern District of Mississippi to decide the critical factual issues that are dispositive of both actions."

The Tennessean, as part of the USA TODAY Network, requested comment from Brooks' attorneys. It was not immediately answered via phone or email.

According to Jane Roe's attorneys, Brooks' efforts to move the case are an intimidation tactic.

“This is just more of the same bullying and intimidation Garth Brooks has used from the moment he learned our client intended to hold him accountable," said Jeanne M. Christensen, a lawyer representing Jane Roe. "We look forward to getting before a jury and reaching the merits of this case.”

Brooks has denied the allegations against him and said that Roe is extorting him. And he is asking to be awarded damages for defamation and emotional distress.

Brooks recently announced the final shows of his sold-out Garth Brooks/Plus One residency at The Colosseum at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas would be in March. He next performance in Vegas is in December.

Leaving the country?Garth Brooks, Trisha Yearwood have discussed living in Ireland amid rape claims, he says

Why did Garth Brooks move his case to federal court?

Brooks attorneys wrote Friday that they want to litigate his case against her, and her case against him, in the same court. Presumably, moving his accuser's lawsuit against him from California state court to federal court in California put them closer to doing that.

There are a number of other strategic reasons Brooks' team may have opted to move the case against him to federal court, says Kate Mangels, a partner at the Los Angeles law firm Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapi

Even if the California and Mississippi cases aren't handled on the same docket, they are now "both governed by the federal rules, so there's more consistency between those cases."

Mangels also said that federal court is thought to move faster, judges may be quicker to dismiss cases and the jury pool pulls from a wider geographic area. "You might get a more rural jury pool, which potentially Garth Brooks' lawyers think would be more kinder to him," she said.

In California state court for civil cases, the jury needs to be unanimous. In federal court in civil cases, only three-fourths of the jury needs to agree to reach a verdict.

Mangels said it is possible for Roe to try and have the case moved back to state court, but that Roe's team would have to make a strong showing as to why the case would be more appropriate in state court.

Garth Brooks accusations:The news is a big disappointment − and an important reminder

What has happened in the Garth Brooks, Jane Roe cases since original lawsuits

After Jane Roe went public with her allegations and the lawsuit, Brooks' team named his accuser in a document later in October. USA TODAY generally does not name alleged victims of sexual assault.

Brooks' legal team said that his accuser's lawyers named Brooks to CNN before the Mississippi court could rule whether Brooks could continue the case under the John Doe pseudonym, and that she "short-circuited the judicial process."

Due to Roe filing the case in California, publicly naming Brooks and "Roe’s willingness to proceed under her name in this litigation," Brooks' filing said, he amended his complaint to include his accuser's real name.

Roe's team responded by filing sanctions against Brooks for his disclosure of her name, also filing an emergency motion to redact her name or seal the amended complaint.

"In revealing our client’s name, Brooks exhibits precisely the type of retaliatory and abusive behavior that compels sexual assault victims to remain silent," a representative from Roe's team said in an email to The Tennessean, part of the USA TODAY network, on Oct. 9.

On Oct. 18, lawyers representing Brooks and his accuser met in Mississippi at the Thad Cochran United States Courthouse, "to argue their positions on two court motions both parties, at times, viewed as an attack on their clients," according to the Clarion Ledger. The judge did not issue a decision on that date.

Audrey Gibbs is a music reporter for The Tennessean. You can reach her at agibbs@tennessean.com.