Green Bay Packers star Josh Jacobs is coming off the NFL’s commissioner exempt list and will be available to return to the field next week.But the running back could still face further punishment as he remains under NFL investigation after pleading no contest to misdemeanor charges of battery and criminal damage to property.Jacobs was placed on the commissioner exempt list on August 30 – meaning he could not play or practice with the Packers – after he was arrested following a May altercation with his then-girlfriend. But according to an NFL statement on Friday, the running back will be eligible to play for the Packers in their Week 7 clash with the Detroit Lions on October 25.’The league’s review remains ongoing and is not affected by this change to Jacobs’ roster status,’ the NFL said.The 28-year-old will officially be removed from the Commissioner Exempt List on Monday, October 19. But, as reported by ESPN, the league could still discipline Jacobs later this season after its investigation under the ‘Personal Conduct Policy.’ Green Bay Packers star Josh Jacobs is coming off the NFL’s commissioner exempt list He pleaded no contest to misdemeanor charges of battery and criminal damage to property. In a statement to the Daily Mail, Jacobs’ attorneys said: ‘Josh has dedicated the last several months to bettering himself, and he accepts responsibility for his actions. He is excited to get back to work and on the field with his teammates. ‘Josh is grateful for the support he is receiving from his teammates, coaches, the Packers organization, and the greatest fans in the world. Since there are ongoing legal matters, he will not have any further comment.’ The Packers are currently 3-2 and the return of Jacobs, who amassed 13 touchdowns and 929 rushing yards last season, will boost Matt LaFleur’s offense.The news comes just a day after it emerged that Jacobs is suing a Wisconsin police department in an effort to keep records and evidence from his battery case permanently sealed.The lawsuit was filed against the Hobart-Lawrence Police Department on Wednesday in Brown County Circuit Court.Jacobs was charged in August with misdemeanor charges of battery and criminal damage to property. Prosecutors claimed to have corroborating evidence in the form of surveillance video from Jacobs’ garage and the NFL star last month pleaded no contest.The 28-year-old was ordered to attend counselling and pay restitution to the victim.In September, district judge Marc A Hammer also cancelled a temporary order sealing the evidence at the victim’s request. Since September 11, the decision of whether or not to release the evidence has been left in the hands of Hobart-Lawrence police, who have thus far refused to share it publicly. The Packers are currently 3-2 and the return of Jacobs will boost Matt LaFleur’s offenseAttorneys for the victim filed a motion in September in their own effort to seal the records.In Jacobs’ lawsuit, his attorney Clarence Duchac cited the victim’s motion while arguing that the evidence should remain sealed.'[Jacobs] joins and supports [the victim’s] position that the identifying, private and sensitive records associated with the underlying incident should not be publicly released,’ read an excerpt published by The Associated Press.The Daily Mail has sought the complaint from Brown County Circuit Court officials as well as the evidence from Hobart-Lawrence police.Meanwhile, the NFL is also trying to obtain the evidence as part of its investigation into the incident, a league spokesman told the Daily Mail last month.Jacobs’ attorney also cited a recent string of robberies at the home of famous athletes in arguing that the evidence from the case should remain sealed.’The public availability of [Jacobs’] schedule or travel information increases the risk that persons could identify periods when [Jacobs] is away from home and use released information concerning the residence, garage, access points, security arrangements, or property to target the property,’ read one portion of the lawsuit. ‘Widespread public dissemination of those details would materially increase [Jacobs’] vulnerability to theft, burglary, robbery, trespass, or other targeted criminal conduct.’