In a tentative ruling Sept. 23 concerning the “data-theft” lawsuit between Move, Inc., parent of Realtor.com®, and CoStar Group, parent of Homes.com, Judge George H. Wu, of the U.S. District Court in California denied Move’s motion for a preliminary injunction and limited expedited discovery.
The case concerns Move’s allegations that former Move employee James Kaminsky, now working for CoStar Group, stole proprietary information helping Homes.com expand its burgeoning business.
After months of both sides filing multiple briefs seeking various continuances, injunctions and discovery rulings, Wu agreed with CoStar.
“The Court is not persuaded that Move has demonstrated, with evidence, likely, and imminent, irreparable harm, even if it can demonstrate past misappropriation at least on Kaminsky’s part,” Wu wrote. “As such, the Court has no need to consider the defendants’ alternative arguments that Move’s alleged slow movement in seeking injunctive relief further demonstrates the absence of any imminent irreparable harm or that the information contained in the alleged trade secrets is ‘stale’ or ‘outdated,’ and therefore not at any risk of CoStar’s future use.
“Moreover, given the Court’s conclusion on the irreparable harm element required for issuance of injunctive relief, it has no need to engage in analysis of the other three elements. Move has not made the ‘clear showing’ that it should be awarded the “extraordinary” and “drastic” remedy of a preliminary injunction. Move’s motion is denied.”
Earlier in his ruling document, Wu expanded on his decision.
“Move’s other efforts that appear to be an attempt to get around the fact that it has not developed actual evidence to support the required threat of imminent, irreparable harm are equally unconvincing.”
Wu also appeared skeptical of Move, Inc.’s legal reasoning in regard to how it would suffer “irreparable harm” without the injunction, and also Move’s lack of evidence regarding the former employee’s alleged misconduct. Assessing Move, Inc.’s claim that the employee might have downloaded another file to a separate computer, Wu wrote that Move “does not explain why this is the ‘likely’ conclusion (and did not explore, through discovery, what other ‘mystery computer’ might contain a download of the file/document).”
Wu additionally faulted Move for failing to engage in discovery with the former employee, and called inconsistencies in the employee’s initial account of what took place as “minor/trivial.”
RISMedia reached out to CoStar and Move, Inc. for comment.
This is a developing story. Stay tuned to RISMedia for updates.
