In a 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absence of any imminent irreparable harm or that the information contained in the alleged trade secrets is ‘stale’ or ‘outdated,’ and therefore not at any risk of CoStar’s future use.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.”
In an emailed statement to RISMedia, CoStar Group General Counsel Gene Boxer said the ruling vindicated CoStar’s position.
“We are grateful that the Court saw through Move’s false claims of harm, and flatly denied Move’s request for an injunction against both CoStar and Mr. Kaminsky,” he said. “In a strongly worded opinion, the Court underscores what CoStar has said all along—Move’s case is built on baseless speculation, not fact. In today’s opinion, the Court noted repeatedly that Move had refused to take discovery, even when offered the chance. That is because the truth is anathema to Move’s case.
“Rather, Move preferred to peddle a baseless narrative that CoStar was using Move documents, when there was zero evidence to substantiate that claim. As we have said from the beginning, this case—which Move has tried to weaponize in the press—is a PR stunt in response to the fact that Move is failing in the marketplace. Homes.com, based on a “your listing, your lead” model, which is both broker and consumer friendly, is accelerating past Move’s failing realtor.com site. Move’s baseless claim for relief, which fell flat today, cannot change that reality. The Court’s decision on Move’s preliminary injunction should put an end to this dispute. However, if Move continues to press this baseless claim in Court, we will fight and win this dispute on the merits.”
A Realtor.com spokesperson emailed that “This ruling is just one step in the process; we look forward to the discovery period and having our day in court.”
This is a developing story. Stay tuned to RISMedia for updates.
